Categories
Economics Programs Michigan

Michigan. On the early years of the School of Political Science, 1881-1887

I very much would like to have a few weeks in each of the libraries of the great state universities of Wisconsin and Michigan to be able to add some actual archival artifacts related to the economics programs in Madison and Ann Arbor, but until then I am happy to troll (in a good way) the internet for content to post here.

Today Economics in the Rear-view Mirror presents an excerpt from The Study of History in American Colleges and Universities (1887) by Johns Hopkins history professor Herbert B. Adams. In 1887 political economy was still served as one ingredient in a stew of social sciences that included a big chunk of history and a dash of social statistics.

____________________________

Other posts
with Michigan content:

____________________________

FOUNDATION OF THE SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE.

In the University of Michigan the development process from the old order to the new was largely aided by the School of Political Science and by the personal influence of Professor Charles Kendall Adams, the first dean of the new school. He appeared as the champion of the Michigan method of realizing the university idea, in a series of letters published in The Nation. A close study of the calendars of the university from 1881 to 1885, and of other official documents, will show that the historical department was foremost in the new movement; and yet the original impulses lay far back in the history of the university, as early as the régime of President Tappan and the opening of senior electives in the year 1856, when Watson took astronomy.

The study of political science was nothing new in Ann Arbor. The subject appears to have been taught by Professor Edward Thomson to the first class that ever graduated from the university. “Political Grammar,” Story on the Constitution, and Wayland’s Political Economy are mentioned in the oldest catalogue (1843-44). The latter subject continued for thirty years in the department of intellectual and moral science. President Tappan (1852-63) taught political economy, protesting that it should be joined with history rather than with philosophy. President Haven (1863-69) taught it in the same old-time way, in connection with mental and moral science and the evidences of Christianity. This was still the situation when President Angell came into office in 1871 (after a presidential interregnum of two years, during which time Professor Frieze was in charge of the university).

In his first annual report President Angell recommended “at an early day a professor to give instruction in political economy, political philosophy, and international law.” He said also that “provision should be made by which every student should be able to take a generous course in the political sciences” (report for 1872, p. 16). So important did the president think these studies that he soon determined to take charge of them himself. His report for 1874 shows that he had conducted a senior elective in political economy for two hours a week, during the first semester, with 48 students; and during the second semester a similar elective in international law, with 46 students. Both classes were taught by dictations and oral expositions, with questions at each meeting upon the topics presented at the previous lecture, In international law the aim was, “after tracing the growth of the laws which govern modern nations in their relations to each other, to expound and criticise the most important of those laws, and to illustrate them as far as practicable from the rich history of our own diplomatic intercourse with the world.” The history of diplomacy and the law of nations have remained to this day the president’s own specialty in the university course. His natural interest in the political sciences; his engagement of Dr. Henry Carter Adams to teach political economy when he himself went abroad for two years upon a diplomatic mission to China, 1881-82; Michigan zeal for political science, kindled by this very appointment; and the conspicuous example of Columbia College in opening a school of political science in 1880 — all these tributary influences entered the historical drift toward a school of politics in 1881. In June of that year the board of regents voted to establish a school of political science within the faculty of literature, science, and the arts.

In the requirements for admission it was provided that matriculated students in the department of literature, science, and the arts, might be admitted as candidates for a degree when they had completed two years of work in the ordinary college curriculum, work which had embraced at least twelve full courses, each averaging five hours a week for one semester, and including all the prescribed studies offered during that period towards the baccalaureate degree. Students with an honorable dismissal from any other college or university, and with a record equivalent to the above, were admitted to the school of political science without examination. Graduates might be received to advanced standing, receiving credit for any portion of the work of the school already completed.

OPENING OF THE SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE.

On the 3d of October, 1881, the new school of political science was formally opened by an address on the Relations of Political Science to National Prosperity, by the dean of the school, Professor Charles Kendall Adams. The address was published by the university, and is a vigorous plea for the encouragement of political science in the interest of good government and the general welfare of the people. The professor chose for his text a passage from Milton’s tractate on Education, wherein the great publicist and poet calls “a complete and generous education that which fits a man to perform justly, skillfully, and magnanimously all the offices, both public and private, of peace and war.” While urging, as educational ground work, the ancient and modern languages, mathematics, and natural science, Milton adds, “The next removal must be to the study of politics; to know the beginning, end, and reasons of political societies; that they may not, in a dangerous fit of the commonwealth, be such poor, shaken, uncertain reeds, of such tottering conscience as many of our great counsellors have lately shown themselves, but steadfast pillars of the state.” Professor Adams’ address was a development of this pregnant thought. He showed the necessary dependence of popular government and institutions upon educated public opinion. He showed that the Puritan foundations of New England and the national endowment of the Northwestern Territory both established schools and supplied the means of education.

Reviewing the examples set by European states, he noted that the excellence of French and Italian administration, in recent years, was due to schools of political science. English politics have been shaped by the economists, by the student of Adam Smith, Ricardo, McCulloch, Cairnes, Thorold Rogers, and John Stuart Mill. The upbuilding of Prussia through the economic reforms of Baron vom Stein was primarily due to the influence of the writings of Adam Smith and to the economic teachings of Professor Kraus in the University of Königsberg. New Germany is the result of such beginnings. The present efficiency of German administration is acknowledged to be the product of university-training and of special schools of political science. But are not American methods better than European? Professor Adams then put a few searching questions: “Is it certain that our municipal governments are better than theirs? Are our systems of taxation more equitably adjusted than theirs? Do our public and private corporations have greater respect for the rights of the people than theirs? Can we maintain that our legislatures are more free from corruption and bribery than theirs? Was our financial management at the close of our war wiser than that of France at the close of hers”?

Professor Adams then demonstrated the necessity of political education in our Republic by reference to the three main branches of government, the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive. Admitting the excellence of our federal tribunal and of the supreme courts of some of our States, our lower courts are, in many instances, a standing disgrace by reason of the ignorance and incompetence of judges, the frequent errors of judgment and delays of justice; “the cost of our judicial system is enhanced by the very means which have been taken to reduce it.” In legislation our country has need of all the wisdom that we can command. “Questions in education, questions in finance, questions in sanitary science, questions as to the control of our penal and reformatory institutions, questions as to methods of administration, as to the government of cities, as to the proper restraints to be put upon our corporations, in short, questions of every conceivable nature and of every conceivable difficulty demand consideration, and demand to be settled in the light of all the knowledge that can be gained from the experience of the world, for we cannot shut our eyes to the fact that some of the very evils are beginning to appear that played such havoc with the republics of the Old World.” Regarding the executive service of State and Nation, the necessity of reform is acknowledged by both political parties. The question now is whether we shall grope our way blindly to good methods of civil service, or whether we shall study the experience of England and Germany, countries that long ago reformed their administration. Besides the great branches of Government, there are two other important fields of influential activity — the press and the platform. In molding public opinion newspapers are more powerful than all other agencies combined. How necessary it is that our journals should have, not merely reporters, but educated journalists, competent to grapple with economic questions and to interpret the politics of the world. In this country there is more political speaking than in any other, on account of our frequent elections. What do our people want? “Not political cant, but political candor; not eloquent frivolity, but earnest discussion. If the history of the last twenty-five years in our country teaches anything, it is that there is much greater need of good leading than there is of good following.”

Professor Adams then said it was for the purpose of aiding in these directions that a School of Political Science had been established in the University of Michigan. He proceeded to mark out the proposed course of instruction and to define the relations of the new school to collegiate work, on the one hand, and to genuine university work on the other. He said that no part of the course would range within “the disciplinary studies of the ordinary college curriculum.” The University “has practically fixed the dividing line for its own students at the close of the second year.” Here would begin the work of the School of Political Science, after the usually required work in the ancient and modern languages, in mathematics, and natural science. “We shall give to our students the largest liberties; but we shall accompany those liberties with the responsibilities of a searching final examination. We shall endeavor to bring no reproach upon the school by giving its final degree to unworthy scholarship. In so far as we strive to imitate any we shall strive to follow in the methods and in the spirit of what we believe to be the best universities in the world.”

COURSE OF INSTRUCTION AND PROGRESS OF THE SCHOOL.

The course of instruction provided for the School of Political Science was based, like the Columbia course, upon historical foundations. The courses already described in connection with the work of Professor Adams and Assistant Professor Hudson constituted not only the basis but a considerable portion of the superstructure of the political edifice. To these beginnings were added elementary and advanced courses in political economy, each a course of two hours a week, by Dr. Henry Carter Adams (Ph.D., Baltimore, 1878), who, in the autumn of 1880, began lecturing in the University of Michigan. President Angell contributed his lectures on international law, two hours a week for one semester, to the up-building process. A course of two hours for a half year was given by Assistant Professor Vaughan on Sanitary Science. Judge Cooley introduced a law course on Civil and Political Rights, three hours a week for parts of both semesters. Social Science was represented, two hours a week for one semester, by Professor Dunster, and forestry, for one hour a week, second half year, by Professor Spalding. This was the course of instruction offered in 1881-82. It is impossible to show a tabular view of the arrangement or succession of courses, for, within such limits as those stated in the historical department, the work was more like the elective system of a German university than like the prescribed system of the Columbia School of Political Science.

In the report of the Dean of the Michigan school for 1882-83 may be found evidences of decided progress during the second year. Professor Adams says: “A grouping of the studies shows that there were twelve courses in History, eight courses in Economic Science, seven courses in Social, Sanitary, and Educational Science, and six courses in Constitutional, Administrative, and International Law. Of these the following were given in 1882-83 for the first time: The course in the History of American Finance, the course on Public Scientific Surveys, the course on the Economic Development of Mineral Resources, the course on the Historical Development of Educational Systems and Methods, the course on the Government of Cities, the course on the History of Modern Diplomacy, and the course on methods of Local Government in Europe and America. The studies offered for the first time during the past year, as well as those previously provided for, were open not only to the registered members of the school, but also to all students of proper advancement in the Academic Department of the University. The classes were in all cases attended by encouraging numbers. Of the students of the school who were examined at the end of the year for degrees, six took the degree of Master and one the degree of Bachelor. Three of those who received the Master’s degree had not previously taken the degree of Bachelor. Of these, two were examined at the end of the fourth year and one at the end of the fifth year in the University. A general survey of the work of the year would seem to encourage the belief that the school is doing a useful service. Of the twenty students who enrolled themselves in the school at the beginning of last year, nearly all carried forward their studies with an enthusiasm that is deserving of the highest praise.”

THE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION.

During the second year of the School of Political Science was organized the Political Science Association. This society was formed “with the design of drawing together into more intimate and sympathetic intercourse the teachers and students of the school, and of encouraging by mutual contact the spirit of scholarly and original research.” The idea of this friendly, co-operative association of students and instructors was probably imported into Ann Arbor from Baltimore by Dr. Henry Carter Adams, who had been one of the original founders of the “Historical and Political Science Association” of the Johns Hopkins University, in 1876, one of the first “Associations” that came into existence in that institution. It was a kind of enlarged form of the “Historical Seminary”; in fact, it was a monthly public session of the same, with invited guests and with an historico-political programme of a somewhat more interesting character than seminary meetings. This appears to have been the complexion of the “Political Science Association” of the University of Michigan. In his report of the School for 1882-83 the Dean said of this society: “Papers were presented by the President of the University, and by several of the professors and students of the school. Reports were given at each meeting of books on Political Science either recently published or recently procured for the University Library.” Some of the papers prepared in connection with the Historical or Political Seminary were finally read before the Association. Several of the subjects mentioned under the head of “Original Work at Michigan” were presented to the larger body. It occupies much the same place in the organization of the historico-political department of the University of Michigan as does the “Academy of Political Science” in Columbia College.

BEGINNINGS OF THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY.

So important is a good working library to a department of historical and political science that the writer has noted with special interest the origin of the present facilities for advanced work in the University of Michigan. It is a striking fact that the first officer appointed by the first board of regents, in 1837, was a librarian, the Rev. Henry Colclazer. One of the first purchases, by vote of the regents, was Rafn’s Antiquitates Americanæ. The first catalogue (1844) mentions a library of between four and five thousand well-selected standard works in literature and science. The selection was largely made in Europe by Dr. Asa Gray, the first appointed professor of Botany, about the year 1840. The library grew by slow accretions, but with no especial vigor, until Dr. Tappan’s election to the presidency in 1852. He stirred the citizens of Ann Arbor to benefactions, and added 1,200 volumes to the old collection. The library and museums developed together. John L. Tappan, son of the president, became the first active librarian. In 1862 Charles Kendall Adams was made instructor in History and assistant librarian — an auspicious connection for the historical department. Soon after (1865) Mr. Andrew Ten Brook, the Historian of State Universities, took charge of the library and administered the same for over ten years, until (1877) the present active and helpful Raymond C. Davis took command of the situation and began to labor, with his colleagues, for a new library building.

THE RAU LIBRARY.

Meantime, in 1870, came the first gift of importance to the University and to the department of History. Acting President Frieze, in his report for 1871, describes the acquisition: “It consists of the entire collection of the late Professor Rau, of Heidelberg, made during his long service of fifty years as professor of Political Economy in Heidelberg University, and embracing all the most valuable literature contained in the European languages on political science and kindred topics. The number of volumes in this collection is 4,034, and of pamphlets more than 6,000. While this munificent gift is of great importance on account of the intrinsic worth of the collection, it is not less valuable as an example which cannot fail to find imitators. It is undoubtedly as nearly perfect as a library can be made on the specialty which it represents. And it was the well authenticated statement of this fact which influenced the authorities at Yale to send an order for the purchase of it before it was known to have been secured for this University. The most important is the series of volumes issued by the Academy of Vienna and those on the original sources of the history of the House of Hapsburg, a work of great importance in the study of European history.” Many of the volumes in the Rau library were unbound, but the donor, the Hon. Philo Parsons,* of Detroit, made provision for binding them and also increased the collection by fresh purchases. (See President’s report for 1874.) The present librarian, Mr. Davis, in his address at the opening of the new library building in 1883, estimated the Rau Library at 4,000 volumes and 6,000 pamphlets.

*The acquisition of the private libraries of distinguished specialists for the collections of American Universities is worthy of mention: Yale has the library of the distinguished Heidelberg publicist, Robert von Mohl, predecessor of Dr. J. C. Bluntschli, whose library went to the Johns Hopkins University, by the gift of German citizens of Baltimore; the library of Francis Lieber was presented to the University of California by [apparently missing text in original] Professor Rau’s collection was given to the University of Michigan by the Hon. Philo Parsons, of Detroit; the library of Neander is now owned by the University of Rochester; the library of Bopp, the German philologist, also that of Professor Anthon, of Columbia College, that of Professor Goldwin Smith, and that of Jared Sparks, of Cambridge, are all owned by Cornell University; the library of Leopold von Ranke has lately been purchased for the Syracuse University.

MOVEMENT TOWARDS THE NEW LIBRARY.

For many years the growth of the library was very slow. In 1874 President Angell reported to the regents that “We are able to add less than 1,000 volumes a year, including public documents of all kinds.” The present librarian, Mr. Davis, states that from 1856 to 1877 the average annual increase was only about 800 volumes; but since that date the increase has averaged 3,000 volumes annually, until, in 1883, the library numbered 40,000 volumes. This increase was largely due to the intelligent demands made by the faculties, by the students, and by the administration. The president in his annual reports repeatedly called attention to the fact that, in proportion to its size, the University library was in more active use than any other in the country.

The files of The Chronicle, the student organ of Ann Arbor, indicate that no need was greater, on the part of the University, than that of a new library and a gymnasium. The editors never ceased to quote mens sana in corpore sano and to reproach the regents for neglecting the body and soul of the University. When Professor Moses Coit Tyler, long the popular champion of the gymnasium cause, accepted a call to the Cornell University the editors understood that he was influenced by “the fact that the Sparks library is there — one of the richest libraries in American literature in the country. It is especially discouraging when it is remembered that the Sparks library might just as well have been secured for this University as not. When it was offered for sale, considerable talk was made about buying it, but the business was managed so slowly and so much time was taken to think about it that President White stepped in and bought it for Cornell.” In the spring of 1882, upon the return of President Angell from his mission to China, the editors promptly observed: “It was very truly said by President Angell, in his address upon the evening of his arrival, that our weak point is our library. It is impossible that in 30,000 volumes can be comprised half the needs of a great and growing institution like this, and equally impossible that, with the present meager appropriation of $2,500 a year, these needs can for a long time be supplied. Harvard has 200,000 volumes in her library, Yale 100,000, Michigan 30,000.”

Source: Adams, Herbert B. The Study of History in American Colleges and Universities. Bureau of Education, Circular of Information, No. 2, 1887. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1887), pp. 114-121.

Image Source: An earlier seal for the University of Michigan that gives the year of Michigan’s statehood as the founding year. In 1929 the regents changed the date on the seal to 1817, when the Catholepistemiad Michigania was founded on the Michigan Territory.

Categories
Economists Michigan War and Defense Economics

Michigan. Account of lecture on economic and sociological theory. Boulding, 1961

 

My first presentation at an ASSA annual meeting took place in an 8-10 a.m. session  on Sunday, December 30, 1979 in Atlanta, Georgia. At “my” session were three paper authors together with the chair. Across from the four economists sitting at the panelists’ table was a public of three. Sitting in the first row of chairs was the thesis advisor of my fellow panelist Robert Scott Gassler, Professor Kenneth Boulding. So considering the product of quality and quantity of attendees, I was pretty fortunate with that early Sunday morning public. Most of the economists following Economics in the Rear-view Mirror have their own stories of brushes with legendary economists and that was mine with Kenneth Boulding. But let’s get to the Boulding content of today’s post.

Kenneth Boulding has always been a favorite of economists with interdisciplinary leanings. Fewer probably remember him as the John Bates Clark medalist (1949) who followed Samuelson and preceded Friedman, Tobin, Arrow, Klein, and Solow. He was one of a dying breed of economists having a range and depth of interests that spanned the social sciences. He has no single method or empirical finding that has survived in the textbooks that I am familiar with. However, in most every random foray into his writings I have usually found some nugget of insight or wisdom to keep. 

This post began as an exploration of the University of Michigan student newspaper archives. I stumbled upon an account of a 1961 lecture given by Kenneth Boulding. The newspaper story included a photo of him that I had not ever seen. Most images one finds are typically of the later, American bald eagle look that was iconic Boulding and how he is etched on my memory. The image from the newspaper article is presumably from 1960 or 1961 and worth including among the economist mugshots shared by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Prefacing the transcribed newspaper report of Kenneth Boulding’s 1961 lecture “Economic Theory and Sociological Theory” are (i) an interdisciplinary verse composed by Boulding (included in his contribution to the 1963 AEA Papers and Proceedings); (ii) the University of Michigan’s tribute to him on the occasion of the award of an honorary doctor of laws degree (1978); (iii) a brief biographical sketch from the finding aid to Boulding’s papers at the University of Michigan.

Links to four published works from 1962 have been appended to the post to provide some meat to the skeleton of a lecture reported in the University of Michigan newspaper account.

____________________________

A Boulding Verse

Four things that give mankind a shove
Are threats, exchange, persuasion, love;
But taken in the wrong proportions
These give us cultural abortions.
For threats bring manifold abuses
In games where everybody loses;
Exchange enriches every nation
But leads to dangerous alienation;
Persuaders organize their brothers
But fool themselves as well as others;
And love, with longer pull than hate,
Is slow indeed to propagate.

Source: Boulding, Kenneth E. “Towards a Pure Theory of Threat Systems.” The American Economic Review 53, no. 2 (1963): 424–34. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1823883.

____________________________

Honorary Degree
University of Michigan
(December 17, 1978)

Since Kenneth Boulding, of the University of Colorado at Boulder, was Professor of Economics at The University of Michigan for twenty years, we may claim him as our own. Here, stimulated by our Institute for Social Research, he was able to go “beyond economics” into the philosophical and psychological problems, ranging from consumer-behavior to war-and-peace, of conflict resolution.

Honors soon followed: the John B. Clark medal for Economics, the American Council of Learned Societies’ prize in the Humanities, the Presidency of the American Association, memberships in the National Academy of Science and the American Philosophical Society. He has been visiting Professor at the University College of Kingston, Jamaica; the University of Natal; the University of Edinburgh; and the International Christian University in Tokyo. He is at home in the world as well as the universe.

A member of the Society of Friends, Professor Boulding has carried his religious commitment into the practice of love to achieve through his more than thirty challenging books goals heretofore deemed unattainable. Early he discovered that the actual writing of poetry is a whetstone with which to sharpen one’s English prose. Out of his discipline, his humanity, and his
faith, Kenneth Boulding, to quote one of his own “eiconic” phrases from The Image, has built a true “Temple of the Mind.”

With admiration and love, therefore, The University of Michigan bestows upon him the degree Doctor of Laws.

Source: University of Michigan. Faculty History Project.

____________________________

Biographical Note from the Boulding papers at Michigan

Kenneth Ewart Boulding, professor of economics and pacifist, was born in Liverpool, England, January 18, 1910. He was educated at New College, Oxford, England (1928-1932) and the University of Chicago (1932-1934). Boulding taught economics at Colgate (1937-1941), Fisk (1942-1943), Iowa State (1943-1946), and McGill University (1946-1947) before joining the University of Michigan as a professor of economics, 1949-1967. Since 1968, Boulding has been associated with the University of Colorado at Boulder as a professor of economics and director for the Program on General Social and Economic Dynamics and the Institute of Behavioral Science.

Some of his related activities and honors included receiving the John Bates Clark Medal for Economics for 1949; a fellowship at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, 1954-1955; visiting professorships in Jamaica (1959-1960) and Japan (1963-1964); and directing the University of Michigan Center for Research in Conflict Resolution (1964-1966). Boulding also wrote numerous books, articles, and book reviews. Boulding was active in several peace, anti-nuclear, and disarmament groups, notably the Society of Friends and the National Council of Churches Department of the Church and Economic Life, and UNESCO. His wife, Elise (Biorn-Hansen) Boulding, was a sociologist and also very active in the international peace movement, women’s issues, and Quaker activities.

Kenneth Boulding viewed economics as a creative and philosophical integration of various disciplines–political science, sociology and anthropology. He coined the word “eiconics” to describe the weaving together and restructuring of interdisciplinary knowledge.

Source:  Finding aid for the Kenneth Ewart Boulding Papers, 1880-1968, University of Michigan Library.

____________________________

Boulding Cites Passage To ‘Post Civilization Era’

By PHILIP SUTIN
The Michigan Daily (March 2, 1961)

“The world is passing from the civilization era to a post civilization era,” Prof. Kenneth Boulding of the economics department said yesterday in, his lecture on “Economic Theory and Sociological Theory.”

He noted that many of the characteristics of civilization are disintegrating. Cities, national defense, poverty, and exploitation which distinguishes this order are now changing.

National Defense

As an example he cited national defense. “National defense as a social system ended in 1945,” he said.

He explained his hypothesis by the theory of oligopoly. In a bipolar situation, for example, each nation has a certain basic home strength and declining foreign power as the distance from that nation increases. A boundary of equal strength exists between the two which shifts with variations in power until one is no longer viable.

However, today nations are at a point where they are no longer unconditionally viable due to their lack of desire or inability to reduce the power of the opposition, he said.

“Oligopoly can be demonstrated by two firms, A and B, which produce identical commodities. The total costs of transportation increase with increasing distance from the firm.

“A boundary of indifference exists between them where the consumer goes equally to both.

Push Boundary

“If A should cut his price, the boundary will be pushed toward B. This price cutting and shifting of boundaries will continue until one cannot cut his price. He can then no longer be viable,” Boulding explained.

“This is analogous to the arms race,” he said.

In discussing social theory, Boulding noted that all social sciences are essentially one. Each discipline takes pieces of the social system, often in incompatible ways.

In their studies social scientists take different levels of abstraction and parcel out the various institutions. The first action, he said, is laudable while the second is deplorable.

However, social scientists cannot study people, as they are much too complicated. So they try to develop a series of abstractions which are relevant to reality.

Meet Difficulties

They run into difficulties, however, in trying to find the level of abstraction. Society encompasses the entire social systems which is fundamentally symbolic, he explained.

“Social scientists have never succeeded in developing a level of abstraction to deal with symbolic systems. They do not know what to abstract out of them or what gives these symbolic systems power,” Boulding said.

Sociology can learn a great deal from economics as many social phenomena have exchange relationships like those that occur in economics.

The basic unit of economics, he noted is the commodity. This world of commodity is seen in terms of price. “It is only accidental to the economist that people move commodities,” Boulding noted,

Generalize Exchange

However, exchange can be generalized, missing important factors in social relationships. As an example, Boulding cited labor relations. “The economist pulls out the commodity from labor, but leaves a great residue. Group relations and alternative uses of time are important factors. A great cloud of reality overshadows- the economic framework of labor relations,” Boulding said.

He noted other comparisons between economics and sociology. The economist, he said, looks at behavior as fundamentally a problem of choice.

The individual looks over the field of alternatives, puts an evaluation in terms of ordinal numbers on each possibility, and chooses number one.

However, “rational behavior may not be sensible behavior” as rationality is merely ordering the field.

The economists view people in terms of this field theory, Boulding explained. Behavorial action tends toward the point of highest utility.

Source: The Michigan Daily, vol. 71, issue 105 (March 2, 1961), p. 5.

____________________________

Sample of Boulding’s Writings
(1962)

  • Boulding, Kenneth E. Conflict and Defense. New York: Harper & Bros., 1962.
  • Boulding, Kenneth E. “Where Are We Going If Anywhere? A Look at Post-Civilization.” Human Organization 21, no. 2 (1962): 162–67. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44127756 .
  • Boulding, Kenneth E. “The Death of the City: A Frightened Look at Post-Civilization.” Ekistics 13, no. 75 (1962): 19–22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43617612 .
  • Davis, James A., and Kenneth E. Boulding. Review of Two Critiques of Homans’ Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, by George Caspar Homans. American Journal of Sociology 67, no. 4 (1962): 454–61. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2775146.

Image Source:  The Michigan Daily, vol. 71, issue 105 (March 2, 1961), p. 5.

Categories
Cornell Dartmouth Economists Harvard Michigan Teaching Undergraduate

Harvard. Recitation section work described. Day, 1914

About 110 years ago the structure of a common lecture and smaller recitation sections for large college courses was novel enough to warrant a description with explanation. The assistant professor of economics and statistician, Edmund Ezra Day (Harvard Ph.D., 1909) penned a two page article for the Harvard Illustrated Magazine that is transcribed following a brief overview of Day’s career. 

Day went on to professorships at Harvard and the University of Michigan followed by a detour through the Rockefeller Foundation that took him to the Presidency of Cornell University. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror begins this post with a chronology of Edmund Ezra Day’s life.

___________________________

Biographical Timeline

1883. Born December 7 to Ezra Alonzo and Louise Moulton (Nelson) Day at Manchester, New Hampshire.

1905. B.S., Dartmouth College (Phi Beta Kappa).

1906. A.M., Dartmouth College.

1906-10. Instructor of economics, Dartmouth College.

1909. Ph.D., Harvard University. Thesis: “The History of the General Property Tax in Massachusetts.”

1910-20. Assistant professor of economics, Harvard University.

1912. Married June 5 to Emily Sophia Emerson (daughter of Dean Charles F. Emerson of Dartmouth College). Two sons and two daughters.

1915. Questions on the Principles of Economics (with Joseph Stancliffe Davis). New York: Macmillan.

1918. Seven months as statistician of the division of planning and statistics of the U. S. shipping board. Director, in 1919.

1918. September to December 1918 as statistician of the central bureau of planning and statistics of the war industries board.

1920-23. Professor of economics, Harvard University.

1920. “An Index of the Physical Volume of Production”. The Review of Economic Statistics (September 1920—January 1921).

1922. Revised edition of Questions on the Principles of Economics (with Joseph Stancliffe Davis). New York: Macmillan.

1920-23. Chairman of the department of economics.

1923-27. Professor of economics, University of Michigan. Beginning second semester of 1922-23 academic year)

1923-24. Chairman department of economics, University of Michigan.

1925. Statistical Analysis. New York: Macmillan.

1924-28. Founding dean of the school of business administration, University of Michigan. (leave of absence during 1927-28).

1927. Dean of Administration, University of Michigan.

1927. President of the American Statistical Association.

1927-28. Leave of absence to act as administrative head of Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial for the promotion of social sciences in New York City.

1928. The Growth of Manufactures, 1899 to 1923. A Study of Indexes of Increase in the Volume of Manufactured Products (with Woodlief Thomas). Census Monographs VIII. Washington, D.C.: USGPO.

1928-37. Director for the social sciences of the Rockefeller Foundation.

1930-37. Director for general education and for the social sciences with the General Education Board.

1932-33. U.S. representative on the preparatory commission of experts for the economic conference, held in London in 1933.

1937-49. President of Cornell University.

1941. The Defense of Freedom: Four Addresses on the Present Crisis in American Democracy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

1941 or 1942. Oncoming Changes in the Organization of American Public Education.  By Edmund E. Day, Chairman of the Committee on Teacher Education of the Association of Colleges and Universities of the State of New York.

1949-50. Chancellor, Cornell University.

1951. March 23. Died from a heart attack.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Other misc. facts: Edmund Ezra Day was president of the New York State Citizens Council, the Association of Land-Grant Colleges and Universities, the World Student Service Fund; he was chairman of the American Council on Education, director of the National Bureau of Economic Research, director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (appointed January 1937), Councillor of the National Industrial Conference Board, and a trustee of Tuskegee institute beginning 1939. He held fifteen honorary degrees.

Sources:

  • Memorial minute. Cornell, 1951.
  • Ithaca Journal, March 23, 1951. p. 1. “Dr. Day, President Emeritus of Cornell, Dies at 67 of heart Attack in his Car.”
  • The National Cyclopedia of American Biography, 1942.

___________________________

Section Work in Economics

EDMUND E. DAY, ’09, Assistant Professor in Economics.

Among the methods of undergraduate instruction, the section-meeting is of large importance. By the section-meeting is meant an exercise attended by only a fraction of the men enrolled in the course. Usually it stands combined in varying proportions with the lecture. Usually, too, it is not in charge of the instructor “giving the course” (sic), but rather of an assistant. But neither of these common features is essential to the section idea.

The most important single question raised by the section method is: What is its purpose? Undoubtedly the section may, and does, serve many ends. It clearly is valuable in the grading of undergraduate work. It is in this rôle that, in many courses, the section is really significant. Such are the cases in which one-half of the only section-hour each week is devoted to a written test, and the balance of the hour to remarks by the assistant. But the section may certainly be made more than an adjunct to the College Office. Obviously, the section-meeting fosters that familiarity between student and instructor which should invariably exert a wholesome influence; serving the same purpose in undergraduate instruction that publicity does in politics.

Furthermore, in many courses the section-meeting offers the only opportunity for open discussion, for a free give and take between instructor and instructed. Such discussion is the sine qua non of effective teaching in many, if not in most, subjects. It develops clear thinking, power in logical analysis, and effective speech. It stimulates that interest which encourages faithful work from day to day, instead of hasty cramming at examinations. In general, it makes for permanent intellectual power as against temporary mental acquisition.

Such being the opportunities of the section-meeting, by what organization and methods may they best be seized? The immediate interest of the student might seem to demand that the instructor in charge of the course should conduct its sections. But this would violate every rule of good economy. Professors of scholarly and scientific experience and reputation, while they would probably give section instruction better than most assistants, have a vastly greater advantage in the work they are at present doing. In the long run they best advance undergraduate instruction by delegating section work to the younger men. Nor is this so generally to the disadvantage of the section as is commonly supposed. As a rule, the young instructor of promise brings to his task a zest, a sympathetic knowledge of college ways and ideals, an appreciation of the difficulties of the beginner which the older man has long since lost. And after all, teaching ability is in large measure a gift which needs little polishing by experience, good teachers are just as rare among older men as among the younger.

Section instructors and students should be, as we have noted, on terms of familiarity. Therefore assistants should be selected with great care. Appointments in the past have perhaps too little emphasized the need of certain human qualities not weighted in the Ph.D. examination. The leaven of a little sympathy, of more good humor, and of still more downright fairness and good sense works wonders in raising the level of section instruction.

Grading seems an essential element in section work, but it should be reduced to a minimum. This does not mean that it should be confined to a written test. Some grading had best accompany work in discussion. This seems necessary to compel intelligent discussion. Too often discussion degenerates into what the undergraduate expressively calls “drool.” Upon the other hand, so-called discussion sometimes is narrowed into mere drill upon the text. The assistant must steer the difficult course between the two extremes. In this endeavor a reasonable amount of inconspicuous “policing” is desirable.

Spirited and stimulated discussion is, after all, the most significant aim of the section-meeting. This imposes responsibilities upon instructor and student alike. The instructor must be able to direct and control discussion, the student must contribute his share of thought and interest; together they coöperate to make section work a success. The test of the section work in any course lies in the quality of the discussion provoked.

The weaknesses of the section are such as to call for improvement, rather than abolition, of the method. Improvement is in large measure a question of money cost. Adequate outlay would probably guarantee section instructors satisfactory alike to students and department staffs. Sufficient outlay to secure assistants with a firm grasp of their subjects is absolutely essential. But some improvements probably are within reach without much additional cost. Thus, by careful provision for standardizing grading, we may reduce the risks involved in the assignment of different students to assistants in the same course but of different experience and temperament. The value of section work may be more generally recognized and upheld. Greater emphasis may be laid on teaching ability in selecting assistants. And finally, possibly in coöperation with the Education Department, assistants may be helped to acquire the gentle art of section work.

Other improvements of the section method will undoubtedly be suggested. But to give it up entirely seems unwise; the section has probably come to stay. It seems, for the present, an advisable concession to large-scale education.

Source: The Harvard Illustrated Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 6 (March 1914), 295-296.

Image Source: Edmund Ezra Day in Harvard Class Album 1915.

Categories
Economists Harvard Michigan

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus. Paul McCracken, 1948

Just as I dream of a digitized data base with a complete historical series of syllabi, examination, and problem sets for the economics courses taught at major universities/colleges from ca. 1870 to the present, I also imagine having a convenient collection of c.v.’s, obituaries, oral histories of members of the overlapping generations of economics graduate students as well as the faculty members who have taught them through the years. Of course there is an overwhelming amount of material out there and Economics in the Rear-view Mirror, thus far, only has the capacity to conduct artisanal scholarship for a prototypical project patiently waiting for generous funding sponsors to help this project grow in scale and scope.

In the meantime, incremental progress for the blog includes occasional additions to its series “Meet an Economics Ph.D.” This post provides information about a 1948 Harvard Ph.D., a former chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, and professor of business economics at the University of Michigan, Paul W. McCracken.

Research Tip: The University of Michigan’s Faculty History Project is a fabulous resource!

________________________________

Harvard Ph.D., 1948

Paul Winston McCracken, A.B. (William Penn Coll.) 1937, A.M. (Harvard University.) 1942.

Subject, Economics. Special Field, Economic Fluctuations and Forecasting.
Thesis, “Cyclical Implications of Wartime Liquid Asset Accumulation.”

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1947-1948, p. 181.

________________________________

Paul W. McCracken
Classroom Profile
(October 21, 1950)

Paul W. McCracken, a member of the faculty of the School of Business Administration since 1948, was promoted to full Professor this summer. He teaches business conditions, but aside from his academic duties, he serves as a Consultant for the Committee for Economic Development, on Monetary and Debt Management Policy. He is also a member of the Economic Policy Committee of the United States Chamber of Commerce, and is Chairman of the Subcommittee on International Commercial Policy, American Economic Association.

Other professional organizations of which he is a member are the Econometric Society, Royal Economic Society (U.K.), Minneapolis Economic Roundtable, Minnesota Economic Club, Midwest Economic Association, Minneapolis Foreign Policy Association, and the Detroit Economic Club. In addition, he is a Trustee of the First Presbyterian Church.

Professor McCracken was born December 29, 1915, in Richland, la. and received his high school education there before entering William Penn College at Oskaloosa, La., and earning the B.A. degree in 1937.  From 1937 to 1940, he served as an Instructor in English at Berea College,  Ky., and then he studied at Harvard University, being granted the A.M. degree in 1942. For the next year he was an Associate Economist for the United States Department of Commerce at Washington, and this was followed by a position as Financial Economist for the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. He was Director of Research there from 1945 to 1948, and he was granted the Ph.D. degree at Harvard in 1948. Professor McCracken is the author of “Hypothetical Projection of Commodity Expenditures,” “Northwest in Two Wars,” “Future of Northwest Bank Deposits,” “Rising Tide of Bank Lending,” various articles on the “Business Outlook,” and “The Present Status of Monetary and Fiscal Policy,” in the Journal of Finance, March,1950 (a paper which was presented to the joint meeting of the American Finance Association in December, 1949.)

Professor McCracken is married to the former Ruth Siler, a graduate of Berea College, and they have two children, Linda Jo, five, and Paula Jeanne, seven months old.

Source: The Michigan Alumnus 43

________________________________

Memoirs, Comments, Discussion
Prof. Emeritus Paul W. McCracken
with Prof. Emeritus Herbert W. Hildebrandt

October 24/31, 2008

What follows are the subjective, human comments of Professor Paul McCracken in an interview on the above date in his office, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan.  The purpose is to collect his personal comments on the years he has spent at the University of Michigan and his reflections in working in Washington DC along with five Presidents:  Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Kennedy, Johnson.

While drafted by Prof. Emeritus Herb Hildebrandt, all of the following comments have been approved after editing by Prof. McCracken.

We are quick to admit there is relatively loose organization of the comments inasmuch as at aged 92 both the respondent and questioner let the ideas flow as they wish.  We occasionally will move from the first to third person in the discussion.

General Reflections, Prof. McCracken

1)  On a personal level, it is interesting and laudable that the University of Michigan in its long history can maintain its high academic standing when a major public University gives extraordinary publicity to athletics rather than academics.  Newspapers shout loudly, and vociferously, when the football team, above all other academic achievements, participates in or leads other teams in a winning season.

Of course major research achievements are noted, sotto voce on an inside newspaper page, as compared with blaring headlines of sports achievements; academic achievements rarely seem to surpass the gridiron success of a football team.

Finally, only the monstrosity of the edifice now under construction (Oct. 2008) surrounding the football stadium suggests a diminution in balance between academics and athletics.  It was never always so.

 

2)  When I came to the University, under the persuasion of Dean Stevenson to join the Business School, I faced a major decision.  At the time of the invitation I was the Director of Research at the Federal Reserve in Minneapolis, a city for which, even today, I have warm affection. There I was happy in my job. It seemed like a positive future and with affection looked forward to a career in the Federal Reserve.

On reflection, in comparing the agonies that Michigan faces today, especially in some of its larger cities, Minneapolis was pleasant, inviting, warm, friendly.

 

3)  I must interject a negative reflection.  That said after remembering that I was hired as an Economics Professor in the School of Business.  At the time we had outside our Business School a stand-alone Department of Economics with whom I tried to seek an affiliation and cordial relationship.

Today we use the words of a ‘silo mentality’, i.e., some scholars and departments seek to remain cloistered, absenting themselves from others who do not walk or breathe the same academic air of pure economics, or are housed with them in what was then a cold, gray building. It later burned down. A retribution?

Indeed, I was looked upon then as a useless citizen, an outcast.  Rarely do I use gentle profanity but my inner Presbyterian self said, “to hell with them”.

But I must stop. The then Chairman, Prof. Sharfman, of the Economics Department was warm, as were some other on the faculty. Slowly, ever so slowly, that animosity faded, but I must say those initial years were personally difficult.

 

4) I add the following as additional perceptions of my early academic and slowly emerging Washington DC days.  Let me, thus, comment on some of my views regarding the political tastes of the early days of the American Economic Association. Early on, in my opinion, there was overt political affection for the Democratic Party. And those of who know me realize my world was/is the Republican Party, a leaning I have held for many years.

Thus, on campus and nationally, there may have been an underground of political concern about my views. I have no overt proof of that statement, but sense my political DNA may have interrupted the natural flow of events, even attitudes toward me as an individual.

As time mutes one’s attitudes, I today soften all of the above comments.

Today it is no mortal sin to be a Republican and a member of the American Economic Association. But I had my doubts years earlier.

 

 5) One of the most often asked questions of me, after holding the position of Head of the Council of Economic Advisors to President Nixon, was “How was he, what is your impression of him?”  Let me give a detailed answer, in multiple parts.

  • Prior to my direct involvement with President Nixon, I was appointed as a member of the CEA (Council of Economic Advisors). There I learned, added to my knowledge of the working of the government. The chairperson of the Council at that time was Herb Stein.
  • Prior to Mr. Nixon assuming the Presidency, he or his staff, recommended that three of us, Arthur Burns, myself, and one other person who I’ve forgotten, were to meet in NYC to discuss economic matters. Putting together initial thoughts on the US economy.  Intrigue, guesses, editorials as to who would be President Nixon’s Sec. of State, and other Cabinet members, ran wild.  Hints were given that possibly I would be asked to come back and head the CEA.
  • A later call from the Washington Post put my hairs on end and I indicated to the caller that no one had spoken with me about the possibility of heading the Council.  To be honest, I had little inclination to enter the inevitable world of politics that that position entailed.  Orally, I signed off on the idea.
  • Subsequently I received one of those phone calls one cannot hang up on: the  President of the United States,  President Nixon was on the line.

“How about it?” he asked.

I knew what he was asking.

“I have a meeting in one hour with the Cabinet and really have nothing to tell them,” he continued.

I said, “I really should talk with my wife.”  (“I knew he had talked with Herb Stein and others; he and others had given their assent.”)

“I called my wife. “Ruth agreed  for a longer tenure in Washington.”

“…I agreed,” I told President Nixon, “to be his Chief Economic Advisor and Chair that committee.  President Nixon had something now to tell his new Cabinet.  “I was somewhat relaxed, and unnerved at the same time.”

“Good,” the President said.

I now jump ahead several years.!  I repeat the most often asked question asked of me:  “How was he, what is your impression of President Nixon?”

Most questions seemingly were couched in a negative tone; they came with an undisguised innuendo of sarcasm similar to the numerous editorial cartoons that depict him in a negative light. Even today.

Time dulls one’s memory and one is inclined to be gentle, never speaking ill of those who have gone before.  I’ll try to be unbiased.

He was a master politician, imbued with innate political skills that out-shown many of those around him.  My dealings with him were always warm, friendly, on a high level of friendliness.  Never did I feel he was condescending.  But I did sense he did let our conversations veer off the main topic, letting our thoughts lose a tight focus. He occasionally slipped away, slipstreaming as one would say of a small airplane, into other topics and concerns.

Regardless, I felt he was consistently deeply concerned about the economy.

One story.  We met at Camp David.  Lovely spot.  The purpose was to discuss whether we should have price controls or not. Forgot who was there, but the dominating theme was President Nixon’s insistence on price controls, in my estimation a no-no that I could never support.  Major counter arguments, on both sides crossed our table. President Nixon listened.  For one of the few times in our group meetings I vehemently opposed the President, arguing against any kind of price control.

He excused himself toward the end of the day.

He later announced he would support price controls, in my estimation a foretaste of an economic disaster. In my estimation it was!

A sidenote.  I have the feeling that he spent the entire night wondering about the issue.  He, there at Camp David, seemed to sleep little.  One story.  Early in the AM he was taking a walk and at the crossroads of two paths, in the dark, ran into a navy man who was coming to work to prepare breakfast.  On realizing it was the President, the navy man blurted, “I’m sorry Mam, yes sir, I’m sorry.”

Soon thereafter, I resigned, knowing I had stepped out of sync with the President. He was gracious in accepting my resignation and asked if I would remain until the end of the year, which I did.

In sum.  He was warm, friendly in the years following our parting.  I visited him on occasions and in private got along well.  Attending his funeral was an emotional event, there being seated among leaders of the world, a bit heady for someone from a small Iowa farm.

  1. HWH:“Paul, we’ll speak about four other Presidents, what was your relationship with President Gerald Ford?  Please bring us up-to-date of your interactions with him.”

…Entirely different relationship.  Indeed, we were personal friends, close friends for a long period of time, our paths crossing in more casual environments than in formal meetings. I’d have to say our human connection was one more of friendship than professional interaction.

A newspaper reporter – there were many that I knew over the years – asked me one day if I knew my name had been mentioned as one who had the ear of the President, my name allegedly being mentioned both in the paper and orally.  I was unaware of that pronouncement.  My personal guess was that a staff person may have drawn that inference.  Oh, occasionally, I did leave Ann Arbor to go to DC and responded to some questions on the economy, but those times were of a short duration.  To be honest, I was eager to return to Ann Arbor.

Thus President Ford and I had a personal friendship. It was comfortable to have affection for President Ford because of his genuine warmth, his commonness, his ability to talk with persons from all walks of life, with little awareness of their stature in life.  We got along well.  And as with other Presidents, it was a deep personal loss when he left us.

 

7. While my political world was Republican, an interesting event occurred soon after President Kennedy was elected.An old, long-time friend of  mine from Harvard days, a Democrat, called me.  His invitation was that President Kennedy wished a small bi-partisan group to meet and prepare for his review a memorandum regarding future economic policy suggestions.

Thus three of us met in NYC, a former head of the Federal Reserve of New York, a member of the Council of Economic Advisors, and myself.  For one week we reviewed options, finally arriving at a consensus document to present to President Kennedy.  Our main thrust was our concern over a lack of gold reserves on which the dollar was based.  Should that information become too public we felt there would be an economic calamity. Additionally adding to our concern, was that on the Congressional books was the requirement that enough gold had to be in our vaults to cover the value of the dollar.

President Kennedy accepted our concern and recommended that someone – I forgot who – appear before a Congressional Committee and have the requirement removed.  My memory further dims and thus do not recall the outcome.

In short.  I found President Kennedy an able person, likable and interested  in the economic situation in our country.  My brief time with him was pleasant.

 

8. My work with President Johnson was of a lesser nature, but again honored that a democrat President, or his staff, would ask me to join a small group that had a single purpose:the nature of the national budget, especially how it was to be formed and amended procedures in putting it together.  We all felt the entire process of budget preparation needed an overall, but knew that in a democracy the task would be difficult.  As part of that group, that discussion was my only tangential involvement in economic affairs during the Johnson tenure.

 

9. All of the preceding governmental actions took me away from my beloved University of Michigan, at that time the School of Business, now called the Ross School of Business after a munificent financial gift from Mr. Raymond Ross.Thus one has the right to ask, “did my Washington experiences have an impact on my teaching, research, and service to the University?

        An emphatic positive  “yes.”

  •  There is merit in being able to bring to a class true-to-life stories on the complicated process of running a government, especially its economic policy.  To cast a stone is easy, but when one is involved in the process it is easy to discern that application of economic theory is a highly complex matter, rarely deeply understood by the casual newspaper writer.  Giving to classes the pragmatic and political nuances, both playing out simultaneously, was for me both invigorating and stimulating – or so I thought in discussions in the classroom.
  • In a sense I began to moonlight, as does Prof. Paul Krugman the economist of Harvard [sic!] who recently won the Nobel Prize for Economics.  He is probably better known for his articles in the New York Times than his economic theories.
    Similarly, I was asked to write an occasional article for the Wall Street Journal.  Indeed,  I am told that as part of the preceding vitae, I wrote over 80 such statements.  (Editor’s comment:  Paul wrote all those statements in long-hand, relying on his long-time secretary, Margaret Oberle, to master the intricacies of the computer.  To this day, Paul still writes in long-hand).
    These many WSJ statements were included in my class discussions and occasioned many letters to me and to the editors of the Journal.
  • Not said out of egotism, but adding personal stories also gave life to what some would call the somber world of economics.  I add one story concerning President Eisenhower, simply to suggest that a President may be the most powerful person in the land, yet is underneath as human as the rest of us, especially when lying in a hospital bed.
    I got a call from one of President Eisenhower’s aides suggesting that the President while in the Walter Reed hospital, sought out long-time friends to come by and visit with him.  The aide suggested the President desired company, finding it lonely lying in a hospital room. My cup was full of responsibilities; my agenda was burdened with appointments.  But how to you tell a sick President that “I’m too busy to see you.”  …“You don’t.”
    I went, thinking that after fifteen minutes an aide would suggest time was up.  An hour slipped by;  how does one politely tell a President that one would like to leave?”  …“You don’t.”  Our chat ranged far and wide.  One comment is still vivid in my memory.  He told me that he remembered when his brother attended the University of Michigan, visiting him there on several occasions. This fact I knew nothing about.  That comment gave me sincere pleasure.
    In sum, our hospital visit with President Eisenhower was one of my more memorable Washington experiences.  His memory was astonishing, his ability to tell a story moving and interesting.  With sadness, three months later, I sat in the Washington Cathedral for his funeral, but with the pleasant thought that I had paused to spend time with him.
  1. HWH: Any comments in general about the University as of now, the end of October ’08?

The University is in for rough water, financially.  One has only to read the financial papers to realize that tuition payments, especially for the smaller private schools, is becoming more difficult for many parents.  We too, even though we’re a State school, will feel the financial ripples.  But not as much.

Surely we receive –  I’ve lost the precise percentage – some of our operating costs come from the State, but that figure has been deceasing over the years.  Increases in tuition cover some of that shortfall, but the University too will bump up against a financial ceiling where devoted parents will find it increasingly difficult to husband funds for their children’s education.

While we receive State funds, those who oversaw our endowment have done so carefully and diligently, and with significant success.  Should the State have serious financial problems – and that’s where the rough water come in – our two sources of funding, tuition driven and endowments, become a major sources of our funding.

My above comments in no way paint a picture of gloom and doom. Our great University has existed for over 150 years, slowly nearing two hundred.  We’ll continue to survive, but the financial waters will continue to disturb a smooth pattern of onward flowing success.

All the above raises a specter that has been quietly voiced over the years:  are we approaching, capturing the aura of a private university?  My data is incomplete – and as an economist lack of data is a kiss of professorial death – yet I sense we are yearly beginning to stand on our own bottom.  That metaphor is a silent mantra, or one not so silent at Harvard University, and is slowly joining the chorus of some here on our campus.  There is little doubt, in my mind, that we are on the doorstep of such a transition.  In a lifetime or two that assumption may become a reality.

It is with sincerity that I say the people I have worked with were highly capable; that fact made my journey at the University of Michigan all worthwhile.

Paul McCracken, November 2008.

Source: The University of Michigan Faculty Memoir Project. Paul W. McCracken (October 24/31, 2008).

Image Source: University of Michigan. Faculty History Project

Categories
Columbia Cornell Economics Programs Harvard Michigan Popular Economics Yale

“Political Economy and the Civil War” by Laughlin that provoked an Economist-Bashing editorial, 1885

Before becoming the founding father of the department of political economy at the University of Chicago, the 35 year old Harvard assistant professor J. Laurence Laughlin (Harvard Ph.D. 1876) published an essay, transcribed below, arguing that liberal college education needed to be expanded beyond Greek, Latin, mathematics, and philosophy to include courses dealing with economic theory and its policy applications. He provides us a table of the limited course offerings in political economy at five major colleges/universities at the time. I stumbled upon an unsigned editorial written in response to Laughlin that I have also transcribed and which is placed at the end of this post. The editorial provides us with historical evidence that ill-tempered economics-bashing is hardly a creation of the Twitternet Age. No siree Bob! The editor was not amused by Laughlin’s presumption, calling him and his college professor colleagues who taught political economy to boys…”vealy milksops”. I dare any or all visitors to sneak that expression into a footnote.

________________________________

POLITICAL ECONOMY AND THE CIVIL WAR.
By J. Laurence Laughlin.

Atlantic Monthly, v. 55 (April, 1885) no. 330, pp. 444-450.

In some parts of our country there is a current maxim among the old-fashioned gardeners to the effect that “a wind-shaken tree will bear much fruit.” There is some subtle force in it. In fact, it is an expression which may be regarded as finding its parallel in individual and social life. As individuals, we know that there is no real growth of character except by a conquest over opposing difficulties; the doing right when it is against our inclinations and prejudices. And in a social organism we seem to see a moral law of conservation of energy by which a sacrifice is the parent of some gain,— a thing which evidently underlies the movements attending many great convulsions in political life. We saw armies go out of our sight during the civil war, only to come back thinned, injured by disease, with half their number left dead on the field. Death meant bitter, indescribable sorrow in all our homes. The experiences of the war were felt to be pitiless, inexplicable, and hard. And yet, perhaps, a subtle suggestion may have come into our minds that it was not simply by dying, or in living, that the best law of our being was enforced; that there was, in truth, some Power behind it all; that some purpose was being worked out through each one of us, just as each leaf on the tree, for example, is necessary to the completed organism of the whole tree, and ceases to be when it is separated from the stem. Now, perhaps, even at this short distance from the struggle, we can begin to see some of the effects of that social and political upheaval, the greatest since the foundation of our government. It is worth while to examine whether the wind shaken tree has borne much fruit.

The process by which citizens from the secluded districts and remote towns were sent through new cities to opposite parts of the Union, exchanging ideas with men of different habits of thought, was a marked feature of the war period, and leavened the mental life of the American people in a way hither to little suspected. It was something like sending a country boy to college, only the effect was multiplied a million times. The rural population came into a knowledge of our cities, while the urban classes were carried out into new climates and into unvisited parts of our vast domain. New sights, new methods of cultivation, different habits of living, stimulated the dull and fired the active and enterprising men in the ranks. The life of the farm and the village was widened to an interest in the nation. About the same time, moreover, came a vast increase in easy means of communication by railways and a greater extension of the use of the newspaper and telegraph, by which provincial towns were brought into direct connection with the outside world. Even oddities of customs and dress began to disappear, in the process of comparison with the more attractive ways of the dwellers in the great cities and towns. In this fashion, the thinking horizon was extended. Dull intellects learned the presence of complicated problems, and brighter minds found new spurs to ambition in the questions of larger interest. On all sides men felt themselves coming daily into contact with new difficulties, under a dim consciousness of their bigness, but with a strong belief that the knowledge how to deal with them was inadequate. In short, the tremendous crisis through which we passed, apart from its effect on the preservation of the Union, has been subtly at work in moral and intellectual directions. The working of these new forces on a quick and susceptible race can easily be imagined. They have, in fact, under somewhat similar conditions, had a distinct influence on a more phlegmatic people than ours. Old students at Göttingen, who have returned to the university since the late wars in which Germany has been engaged, have been amazed to find the old-fashioned spot — where the customs, habits, and naive simplicity of one hundred years ago had prevailed until quite recently — now wholly changed. The commercial spirit has seized the formerly simple-minded peasants, and the quiet town now hears the heavy march of cosmopolitanism in its streets.

Like Germany, the United States had new problems to solve. While the conflict closed the long slavery struggle, it brought with it intricate questions, but of a character very different from those which had gone before. Without warning, and consequently without the ability to get due preparation or acquire proper training, our public men were confronted, as the war progressed, with matters of vital importance in international and constitutional law, in taxation, and in every form of administration and finance. The demand for men who had given themselves more particularly to the province of governmental science was an imperative one; but it was, generally speaking, met in a way which showed that there existed in the community a class from whom these necessary men could be recruited. That class was the legal profession of the country. The questions of reconstruction, the relation of the general government to the States, the civil rights of the negro, our relations with foreign powers during the blockade of Southern ports, were not abandoned to men who had never habituated themselves to discussions such as were involved in their settlement. There were differences of opinion, of course; but inasmuch as these differences of opinion were produced by different political theories, this proved that attention had been given to such subjects to the extent that a crystallized system of thought, formulated in dogmas, had been created by the various parties.

But, as has been suggested, new considerations arose. The magnitude of the military operations involved an enormous expenditure of money by the state, and made a demand upon our statesmen for financial skill of an almost unparalleled kind. To meet these extended questions of taxation, finance, and currency, what body of men could be called upon? To this, answer must be made that the war overtook us without a supply — or even a few — of trained economists and financiers. The economic part in the equipment of a public official had been wholly neglected. In fact, political economy and finance had never been seriously studied in the schools; but, if studied, they were classed in the old-fashioned required curriculum with Butler’s Analogy and the Evidences of Christianity. Although Adam Smith wrote his Wealth of Nations in 1776, political economy was an unknown science to the American people before 1860. It is an interesting study to examine the manner in which our people went under the burdens and tasks of our great civil conflict. There was the quick adaptability of Americans to start with; there was plenty of patriotism and good will, and no lack of those high qualities of self-sacrifice and heroism which are still fragrant to us; but lawyers, such as Chase and Fessenden, were practically our only financiers. Early in the war they were required to consider a scheme — for the right settlement of which a vast experience is necessary — of raising loans, and adjusting a plan of taxation corresponding to the extraordinary war expenses. Without considering alternatives, in a few years they created a debt as great as that incurred by old despotisms of Europe in centuries; without foresight, they drifted into a ruinous issue of irredeemable paper money; without intending it as the object of a definite policy, but through a desire simply to gain a war revenue, they established an extended system of “protection to home industries” by levying duties on imports, which has brought into existence business interests largely dependent on the continuance of these temporary war measures. When it is realized that principles of taxation are to-day probably less understood than any other branch of economics, it is not surprising to find that in 1864 Congress was occupied only five days in passing the most gigantic taxation measure of the war. The National Bank Act, which has given us the best system of banking ever enjoyed by the country, was, however, in reality passed as an act to facilitate the sale of our bonds and aid our tottering credit. We blundered egregiously, but we were capable of learning by experience. Yet it was from these very blunders, from this revelation of inexperience made evident by the demands of a great emergency period, that the community received an impetus toward the study of economic questions which was certain to result in good fruit.

In fact, it is now clear that a new interest in economics and finance has already arisen. The civil war was, so to speak, the creation of economic study in the United States. The war did for this country — in a different way, of course — even more than the corn-law agitation did for England. It actually gave birth to new motives for study. There never was a time in our history when there was so evident a desire to get light on the economic problems of the day as now. There is a new stir among the ranks of the young men at college; and the printing-press sends forth an increasing stream of new books upon subjects which are constantly discussed in the daily newspapers. There is unquestionably a new-born, slowly growing attention by the younger men of our land to the necessity (as well as the duty) of fitting themselves properly for the responsibilities of citizenship. If the war has given us this, — the absence of which used to be so often lamented a few years ago, — then may some of our sacrifices not have been in vain. The wind-shaking has resulted in abundant fruit.

In the present awakening in educational discussion, one phase of which has been called the “Greek Question,” it is worth while to notice the influence of the war period on the college curriculum. In most of our schools and universities, on the breaking out of the war (and even to the present day), the pecuniary resources and endowments had been tied down, under the force of old traditions, to supply instruction in the customary Greek, Latin, mathematics, and philosophy, which were then considered the only essentials of a liberal education. But when the rude shock of the war awakened us to our ignorance, and we looked around for the schools where the new studies could best be followed, it was discovered that the college curriculum made practically no provision for such instruction. In the old days when sailing vessels alone entered Boston harbor, only one channel was practicable, and all the fortifications were placed in a way to command it: but when steam took the place of sails, another channel was adopted, but it is now wholly undefended. The old ship channel must be defended, but so must the new one. So, in the collegiate studies, the old subjects are necessary, of course, but they are not the only necessary ones. The new demands, due to the progress of the age, must also be met. In fact, the response of the schools to these new demands is at once the evidence and result of the quickening and stimulating forces so briefly sketched in these pages. A comparison of the amount of instruction in political economy given by the principal institutions of the land in the years 1860, 1870, and 1884 will furnish us new proof that the wind-shaken tree is yielding full fruit.

Nothing could show more distinctly than the accompanying table how young any real systematic study of political economy is in this country, and it accounts for the lack of any number of trained economists among us. But the younger generation are happily recruiting their ranks, now that these better opportunities are open to them.

At no time, however, have public affairs demanded unpartisan study in economics more than to-day. In past centuries governments were supposed to labor, in an unsettled state of society, for the protection of life and property. Now that the general progress of civilization and Christianity has made life and liberty more secure, legislation in later years has concerned itself rather with property than life. In the Middle Ages trade was considered plebeian; to fight or to oppress was regarded as more noble. Now the chief solicitude of the modern state is the increase of wealth: the castles have become mills; retainers, productive laborers; and arms, the hammers and tools of the artisan.

1860.

1870.

1884.

Yale College. One third of Senior year One third of Senior Year 1.  Elementary Course. — Fawcett. — Discussions on currency, banking, and taxation. 3 hours a week for 13 weeks.
2.  Elementary Course. — Mill. — Currency, banking, and taxation. 2 hours a week for a year.
3.  Advanced Course. — Discussion of economic problems and fallacies, with selections from leading treatises. 2 hours a week for 20 weeks.
4.  Graduate Course. — Finance and the Art of Politics, as illustrated in the History of the United States. 2 hours a week for 2 years.
5.  Graduate Course (in alternate years.) — In 1883-4, Sociology. In 1884-5, Industrial History, History of Political Economy, Finance and Theory of Rights. 1 hour a week for each year.
6.  History, business methods, and social problems, of Railroads. 2 hours a week for a year.
[A course about equal to Courses 1 and 2 is given in the Sheffield Scientific School.]

Cornell University.

[Institution not founded]

One third of Junior Year

1. Elementary Course. — Lectures and Recitations. 2 hours a week 2/3 of a year.
2. Lectures on Political Economy.5 hours a week for 1/3 of a year.
3. Lectures on Finance.

University of Michigan.

Not in the Course of Study.

One Term of Senior Year.

1. Elementary Course. — Lectures. 3 hours a week ½ of a year.
2.  Advanced Course. — Competition, Free Trade and Protection, Commercial Depressions, Transportation, etc. 3 hours a week ½ of a year.
3.  Principles and Methods of Finance. — Banking, National Debts, etc. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
4.  History of Industrial Society [not given in 1883-4]. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
5.  Financial Seminary.— History of American Finance. 2 hours a week ½ of a year. [Not given 1883-4.]

Columbia College.

Elective in one part of Senior Year.

One Term of Senior Year.

1.  Principles of Political Economy.— Elementary Course. Rogers’ Manual. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
2. History of Politico-Economic Institutions. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
3.  Finance and Taxation. 2 hours a week ½ of a year.
4.  Statistical Science, Methods and Results. 2 hours a week ½ a year.
5.  Communistic and Socialistic Theories. 2 hours a week ½ a year.
6.   [Topics like railways, banks etc., are placed under Administrative Law.]

Harvard University.

One half of Senior Year.

1. Rogers’ Manual One half of Junior Year 1. Elementary Course.— Mill’s Political Economy. Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. 3 hours a week for a year.
2. Elective Course for Seniors: Adam Smith, Mill, Bowen. 3 hours a week for a year. 2. Advanced Course.— History of Political Economy. Cairnes, Carey, George, and recent literature. 3 hours a week for a year.
3. Investigation of Practical Questions of the Day.— Banking, Money, Bimetallism, American Shipping, Note Issues, etc. 3 hours a week for a year.
4. Economic History since the Seven Years’ War.— 3 hours a week for a year.
5. Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany.— 1 hour a week for a year.
6. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States.— 1 hour a week for a year.
7. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States.— 1 hour a week for a year. [Omitted 1884-5.]
8. History of Financial Legislation in the United States. 1 hour a week for a year.

Consider the character of the questions at this time pressing upon Congress for immediate attention. If we omit the administrative and political legislation on the civil service, the succession to the presidency, and a national bankruptcy law, the remaining questions before Congress to-day are almost entirely economic. (1.) There is, in the first place, the false silver dollar, masquerading in sheep’s clothing, and waiting to catch the unwary business world napping, when it will suddenly assume its true depreciated character, and devour fifteen or eighteen per cent of all creditor’s dues estimated at present prices. What is Congress doing here? Just what it did in the last months of 1861, when it let the country drift on to the shoals of depreciated paper. Monometallists and bimetallists, business men and bankers, are assaulting the dangerous silver legislation, and yet Congress is a very Gibraltar in which the silver owners are intrenched. (2.) Next, there is the banking question. Nothing can be more delicate and sensitive than the machinery of credit and banking in a great commercial country such as this; and yet men, to satisfy the prejudices of constituents, handle this mechanism with about the same air of cheerful indifference as that of a child who drags a rag doll round by the heels. The present national bank notes give a stability to trade in separate parts of the Union, by means of a currency equally good in Maine and Texas, never reached in the days of the vicious and changing state banks; and yet the present system is gradually vanishing before our very eyes, as calls are made for government bonds. (3.) Again, Congress is struggling with the most difficult of all problems, – national taxation. It means a reëxamination of our whole scheme of taxation, the retention of internal taxes on distilled spirits and tobacco, the management of our surplus revenue, the whole sub-treasury system; while the situation inevitably requires a readjustment of our customs duties. Duties needed in order to procure a large revenue in time of war are no longer necessary when the war is ended, and the national debt is reduced one half. (4.) There are the barbarous and mediaeval navigation laws, to which we cling with a curious indifference to the influence of all progress and liberal ideas. The problem of our shipping and merchant marine needs the touchstone of some wider training than is furnished by selfish individual interests. (5.) Our public lands and the settlement of our vast Western domain are important matters of land tenures, and yet they are abandoned to accident, while the possibilities of good disappear under the cloud of accomplished facts, where nothing can be done. It will not be long before all the public lands will be gone, and yet no notice is taken of existing evils. (6.) Then, again, one has but to mention the word “railway,” and there arises to the mind a congeries of difficult questions dealing with Western “grangers,” the ability of the state to regulate freight and passenger charges, and in fact the whole vexed discussion of state interference. Here is a field by itself, to which a man may well give his whole life-work. (7.) It would be wearisome to more than mention the topics of Postal Telegraph, Chinese Labor, Strikes, Trades Unions, and Communism, which attract our instant attention. (8.) Then again the unfortunate legal-tender decision of Judge Gray has brought back to us all the troublesome and intricate discussions on the currency which we once thought had been forever settled. As matters now stand, power is given to Congress, if it chooses, to repeat all the errors of Continental currency policy, and we are put back a century in our paper money teaching. (9.) To pass from merely internal matters, so long as we were the only civilized people on the western continent, our relations with our neighbors gave us little thought. The growth of commerce, the expansion of populous areas north and south of us, the discovery of mineral wealth outside our own limits, which invites our capital, has forced on us the consideration of reciprocity with Canada and Mexico. We have refused reciprocity to Canada; but to-day we are considering the desirability of granting closer commercial relations with Mexico, while Cuba and Porto Rico have asked the same advantages by a new treaty.

Such, in brief, are some of the subjects which must be made matter of instruction in our schools and universities. It will be observed how overwhelming a proportion of public measures at present are economic, and what a heavy responsibility lies upon our institutions of learning, if they are to meet the new demands in a fitting manner. But there is a still stronger reason for strengthening our educational forces on the economic side. This is to be found in what may be called the “economic portents.” To the present time we have been properly called a “young country,” which to the economist means an abundance of unoccupied land, a scanty population, large returns to capital, and high wages. A full knowledge of our resources has not practically been reached as yet, and will not be, probably, for a considerable time to come. These resources and the lusty health of our young country have made it possible heretofore for legislators to blunder with impunity. Constantly receiving large returns, labor and capital would not naturally be over-critical and hostile to each other. The young-country theory has also led to the encouragement of unlimited immigration, with which to settle our prairies and build up our towns. These new-comers do not, in fact, all go upon the land; but, arriving on our seaboard, instead of being drawn off entirely, they remain in the cities, like dirty pools of water in the streets. Indeed, the importation of uneducated, un-American, un-republican workmen from foreign lands is a problem in itself, and makes a strong demand upon all who can possibly do so to educate these masses, both economically and politically. Lawless communism, it is said advisedly, feeds on bad workmen. A saving mechanic is never a communist. To-day these men mean little to us; but when, by an increasing population and a denser settlement of the country, land becomes more scarce and valuable, profits on capital lower, and wages less, then even honest men, finding themselves pinched by a barrier of their own creation, brought into operation by natural laws, unless economically trained, will not know what is happening, and may in entire ignorance fly in the face of the law, and do in the United States somewhat of the things they are now doing in Europe. The day is more or less distant when this may happen, but it is coming nearer in proportion as the methods of men accustomed to conditions in old and crowded countries are brought here by a never ending stream of immigration.

The war has plunged us into the consideration of gigantic questions of an economic character, and the growth of our country in numbers and wealth is making a true understanding of them more necessary than ever to the prosperity of the nation, and a rising tide of interest in such studies is unmistakably evident. But these new and increasing demands are met by meagre and inadequate means in the great schools. It is a surprising fact that in some of the most important institutions there is no separate provision for such studies, and not even one settled instructor. Above all, we must educate in an intelligent manner, by stimulating investigation into home problems, and by encouraging the preparations of monographs on some out of the multitude of our economic questions. The best of the men in the university cannot now find a career in economic teaching, because few positions exist in this country as an object for honorable and ambitious students. Men find a profession in teaching Greek and Latin, but not Political Economy. When the community wakes up to a realization of this gap in the instruction of the land, and the importance of filling it, we may hope to see a more correct relation between means and needs than now exists.

________________________________

COLLEGE PROFESSORS AS ECONOMISTS.

Mr. J. Laurence Laughlin, in the Atlantic Monthly for April, appends his name to one of those egotistical screeds which serve to make those who teach political economy to boys contemptible in the sight of those who have occasion to practice legislative economies as practical statesman. Its fundamental assumption is that for want of the wisdom with such boys as Laughlin and Sumner possess nearly all that Hamilton, Gallatin, Chase, and Fessenden have done in America and quite all that Colbert, Napoleon, Pitt, Turgot, and Bismarck have done in Europe in an economic and financial way has been sad botchwork. Why do magazines like the Atlantic Monthly publish such ridiculous rant?

Instead of Chase and Fessenden having been in need of going to school to such vealy milksops as J. Laurence Laughlin, this college tutor shows on every page that he writes how greatly he needs the practical information which he could have got by attending for two or three years on the sessions of the Ways and Means Committee at Washington. Indeed, it is not legislators that need to be educated in economics by college professors, but college professors who need some means of picking up a few grains of sense by being brought into contact with actual legislation.

It is a singular fact that no man who has ever accepted a chair in a college as a teacher of political economy to boys has ever yet rendered any demonstrable service either to the cause of economic science or of legislation. Laughlin has the impertinence to say that, though Adam Smith wrote his “Wealth of Nations” in 1776, political economy was an unknown science to the American people before 1860. Does Mr. Laughlin mean to assert that Franklin, the intimate personal friend of Adam Smith and suggestor of some of his views, or that Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Clay, or Webster, Chase, Fessenden, Garfield, or “Pig Iron” Kelly are any less familiar with Adam Smith’s crudities, blunders, wisdom, and garrulous mud than Laughlin himself is? Adam Smith fell so far below Alexander Hamilton, and in many respects below Madison and Chase, in economic insight that while every commentator on Smith points out errors of fact and of theory, stupidities of ignorance and obliquities of vision on every page of the old scotch dullard and mugwump, we challenge Laughlin to point out with equal ease the ignorances and blunders in Hamilton’s economic papers or financial reports.

Adam Smith had the merit, however, of only styling his work as an “Inquiry.” It is the men who come after him who arrogate for his utterly unscientific, undefined meandering, inconsequential and self-contradictory fog-banks the quality of a science. Still Smith is helpful matter to a sensible legislator, because the latter can generally see on the face of Smith’s statements wherein the good Scotch plodder was wool-gathering, and could rectify Smith’s errors out of his own more modern and ample reading. The notion however, that Cairnes, Mill, Jevons, McLeod, Say, Lavelaye, or any other boy teachers have ever been helpful in matters of practical legislation is not warranted by facts. Ricardo was listened to with great respect by practical legislators, but he was a practical businessman like Franklin, the Careys, and Greeley, who had never undertaken the egotism of a pedagogue. The only economists America has yet produced are those who have either never or hardly ever sat in a professor’s chair. There seems to be something in the air of a school room which, if the professor remains in it until it conquers him, unfits him absolutely to mingle as a man among men in the affairs of men. It causes a cranky adoption of the most impracticable and erratic notions on the most inadequate basis of observation and fact, and at the same time inflates with a lofty and unapproachable egotism which precludes its possessor from meeting the views of an opponent with anything but epithets, however superior his opponent may be to himself in learning, experience, or sagacity. A precipitancy that has no nerves left for investigation and patience at criticism marks his every act and word. Laughlin shows this demoralizing precipitancy, so fatal to level-headed usefulness, by speaking of the silver coin, whose equal dignity with gold coin in all legal respects is irrevocably fixed in the letter of the Constitution of the United States, “as the false silver dollar,” thereby implying, of course that from 1853 to 1870, when silver happened to be worth more than gold, we must have been under a “false gold dollar.”

Laughlin also calls those navigation laws which have never existed either among barbarous or medieval nations, but which began in England under Cromwell, “barbarous and medieval.” He might as well call steam or the art of printing “barbarous and medieval.” Sensible man weary of these impudent epithets flung at them by young and graceless upstarts who have still their spurs to win in everything that distinguishes useful men from snobs.

SourceThe Inter Ocean (Chicago, Illinois) April 15, 1885, p. 4.

Image Source: Portrait (1885-88) of James Lawrence Laughlin. Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum, Transfer from the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts.

Categories
Economics Programs Economists Harvard Iowa Michigan Undergraduate

Harvard. Application for Admission to Economics Ph.D. Program. Edward H. Chamberlin, 1922

 

The archived student records of the Graduate School of Arts and Science at Harvard University provide us material needed to write a prequel to a Ph.D. economist’s professional biography. To illustrate the the richness of such material, I have transcribed Professor Edward Hasting Chamberlin’s application materials that he submitted to Harvard. Judging from a couple of issues of Iowa’s “The Hawkeye Yearbook”, it does appear that Edward Chamberlin was quite a Busy Man on Campus during his undergraduate years.

Pro-tip. More information about the faculties and courses of instruction during Chamberlin’s pre-Harvard  university days can be culled from the respective university catalogues archived at  hathitrust.org:

Catalogues of the State University of Iowa.
Catalogues of the University of Michigan.

Fun-fact: Edward H. Chamberlin played the role of Geoffrey Rawson in the production of Mrs. Bumpstead-Leigh performed May 12, 1920 at the Englert Theatre (joint production of the Erodelphian Literary Society and Irving Institute). The Hawkeye Yearbook, 1921.

_____________________________________

POLITICAL ECONOMY, SOCIOLOGY,
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

532 Thompson St.
Ann Arbor, Mich.
April 11, 1922.

Mr. George W. Robinson, Secretary
The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences,
Harvard University,
Cambridge, Mass.

Dear Sir:

Enclosed with this letter are transcripts of my work at the State University of Iowa and at the University of Michigan and my application for admission to candidacy for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics at Harvard University. Under separate cover I am making marked copies of the University of Michigan and the State University of Iowa. In some cases the catalogues do not indicate the work taken on account of changes. In these instances I have tried to duplicate the needed information in the margins.

I am making my application early so that I may know in advance as much as possible about the work I must take for my degree I presume that individual courses are not settled upon until after a conference. I shall be glad if I may know this spring how much credit will be allowed me for previous work, how much additional coursework will be required, and in what general branches.

Very truly yours,
[signed]
Edward H. Chamberlin

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF
ARTS AND SCIENCES

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO CANDIDACY FOR A DEGREE IN ARTS OR PHILOSOPHY

NAME:  E. H. Chamberlin

DATE   April 1922

DEGREE APPLIED FOR Ph.D.

SUBJECT Economics

COLLEGE State U. of Iowa and U. of Mich.

REMARKS

B, except for French

25 Apr. 1923: French O.K.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Application for Admission to Candidacy for a Degree in Arts or Philosophy

[Note: Chamberlin’s responses in his application have been highlighted using boldface.]

Return this application, with certificates of other evidences of scholarship and character, to the Secretary of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, No. 24 University Hall, Cambridge, Mass.

Applications for the degree of Master of Arts or Doctor of Philosophy will be received as late as the fifteenth day of January of the academic year in which the degree is to be taken; but candidates are urged to file their applications at the beginning of the year or ealirer, so that they may receive timely advice with reference to the work that will be expected of them for the degree.

The application should be accompanied by a Recorder’s or Registrar’s certificate of the applicant’s college or university work, and also, if possible, by a college catalogue or catalogues in which the studies he has taken are clearly marked. Final admission to candidacy for a degree is always conditional upon satisfactory official certification of the facts stated in the application.

Applications for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy should be filed, if possible, at the beginning of a student’s Graduate work for the degree.

An applicant for the degree of Master of Arts, who wishes to take later the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, should state the fact in his application for the Master’s degree, which will then be considered with reference to both degrees.

  1. Full name. Edward Hastings Chamberlin
  2. Post-office address. (Give prompt notice to the Secretary of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of any change.). 532 Thompson St., Ann Arbor, Mich.
  3. Date and place of birth. La Conner, Wash. May 18, 1899.
  4. High schools or other preparatory schools attended, and periods of attendance. Iowa City (Iowa) High School. 4 years
  5. Colleges and universities attended and periods of attendance. What course did you take (classical, literary, scientific, etc.)? Univ. of Iowa. 1916-1920. Commerce; Univ. of Michigan. graduate. 1920-1922.
  6. If you are an undergraduate, state: (a) What degree you expect, and when. [left deliberately blank]. (b) Rank or average standing in class [left deliberately blank]
  7. If you have received a degree, state what degree, from what college, and when. B.S. in Commerce, Univ. of Iowa, June, 1920; M.A. University of Michigan, June, 1922.
  8. If you have been a Graduate student at any college or university, state where, when, and in what subjects. State University of Iowa, summer sessions 1920 and 1921. Income Tax. Pol. Science; Univ. of Michigan 1920-1921, 1921-1922, Economics, Philosophy.  and name your principal teachers in those subjects. Iowa. Prof. R. A. Stevenson [Associate Professor of Accounting, Russell Alger Stevenson, B.A. Michigan, 1913; M.A. Iowa, 1915; Ph.D. Michigan, 1918], Prof. Jacob Van der Zee [Assistant Professor of Political Science Jacob Van der Zee, B.A. Iowa, 1905; B.A. Oxford, 1908; M.A. 1913; LL.B. Iowa, 1913]; Michigan, Prof. F. M. Taylor [Professor of Political Economy and Finance Fred Manville Taylor, Ph.D.], Prof. I. L. Sharfman [Professor of Economics Isaiah Leo Sharfman, A.B., LL.B.], Dean Alfred H. Lloyd [Professor of Philosophy and Dean of the Graduate School Alfred Henry Lloyd, Ph.D.].
  9. Honors or other evidences of high scholarship awarded to you. Phi Beta Kappa. Beta Gamma Sigma.
  10. For what degree (or degrees) do you wish to be a candidate, and when? Doctor of Philosophy in Economics, September 1922.
  11. Of the following branches, underscore once those which you have studied in college, and [mark with an asterisk (*)] those in which you have done advanced work. This information should be supplemented by a carefully marked and annotated catalogue or calendar.
Hebrew Government Physics
Sanskrit *Economics Chemistry
Greek Sociology Botany
Latin *Philosophy Zoölogy
English Composition Education Geology
English Literature Fine Arts Physiography
German Architecture Mineralogy
French Music Mining
Italian Mathematics Anthropology
Spanish Astronomy Subjects not classified above.
History Engineering Psychology
Journalism
  1. (a) State which of the languages named below you have studied, and how long in each case. German 1 1/2 yrs. high school; 2 yrs. Univ.  French [deliberately blank], Greek [deliberately blank], Latin 2 years high school. Any modern foreign language other than German and French. Spanish.  (b) Do you know German and French well enough to be able to consult works on your subject in these languages? German-yes; French-no.
  2. In what subject do you wish to be considered as a candidate for a degree? State in detail your previous work in this subject.

Economics

Industrial History
4 sem. hrs.
Intro. to Econ. Theory
6 sem. hrs.
Research in Accounting
2 sem. hrs.
Commercial Geography
4 sem. hrs.
Cost Accounting
4 sem. hrs.
Railroads
3 sem. hrs.
Prin. of Economics
6 sem. hrs.
Public Utility Accounting
2 sem. hrs.
Essentials of Ec. Theory (continued)
2 sem. hrs.
Prin. of Accounting
6 sem. hrs.
Income Tax
2 sem. hrs.
 

*The course in Ec. statistics had nothing to do with statistics but dealt with the nature of income and sundry other subjects.

 

Business Efficiency
4 sem. hrs.
Essentials of Econ. Theory
2 sem. hrs.
Corporation Finance
4 sem. hrs.
Commercial Law
4 sem. hrs.
Banking
2.6 sem. hrs.
*Economic Statistics
4 sem. hrs.
Problems of Peace and Reconstruction
1.3 sem. hrs.
Studies in Econ. Theory
(History of Econ. Thought)
2 sem. hrs.
Industrial History
4 sem. hrs.
Intro. to Econ. Theory
6 sem. hrs.
  1. Present occupation. (State definitely.) Instructor in Economics, University of Michigan.
  2. If you are, or have been a teacher, what positions have you held? at what institutions? in what subjects? and during what periods of time? Instructor, University of Michigan (1920.-1921; 1921-1922) and University of Iowa (Summer Session 1921); Economics and Accounting—Sept. 1920 to June 1922.
  3. From whom can information as to your previous work be obtained? Prof. F. M. Taylor [Professor of Political Economy and Finance Fred Manville Taylor, Ph.D.], and Prof. I. L. Sharfman [Professor of Economics Isaiah Leo Sharfman, A.B., LL.B.], Ann Arbor, Mich.; Prof. F. H. Knight [Associate Professor of Economics Frank Hyneman Knight, B.S. Tennessee, 1913; A.M. 1913; Ph.D. Cornell, 1916], University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
  4. List of printed and written documents submitted with this application. Catalogue, University of Michigan—separate cover; Catalogue, University of Iowa—separate cover; Certified record of courses pursued from Iowa and Michigan

Signature. [signed] Edward H. Chamberlin
Place of writing this application. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Date. April 11, 1922

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
IOWA CITY

TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD

of Edw. Hastings Chamberlin
College Liberal Arts

Secondary Credits Accepted from Iowa City, Iowa

Units

Latin

2

French
German

English

4

History—Gv.—Econ.

2

Algebra

P. & S. [Plane & Solid] Geometry

Science

2

Draw.

2

16

Entrance conditions: none

Degree B.S.C. Conferred [date] 6-15-20

This is a true statement of the credit earned by Edw. Hastings Chamberlin in the college of Liberal Arts of the State University of Iowa.

[signed] [?Signature illegible], Asst Registrar
Date 7/31/20

1916-17

Cat No

Subjects 1st Sem 2nd Sem
Hrs Gr Hrs

Gr

Drill

excused

½

B

Phy Training

excused

½

Cr

Fresh. Sect.

1

C

1, 2 Eng. (Rhet.)

2

A 2

B

13, 14 German (Interm.)

5

C 5

C

5 Math. (Trig. Alg.)

5

A

3 Econ (Ind.Hist.)

4

B

4 Econ. (Com. Geog.)

4

B

6 Math. (An. Geom.)

5

A

1917-18

Cat No

Subjects 1st Sem 2nd Sem
Hrs Gr Hrs

Gr

Drill

.5

Cr .5

Cr

1 Econ (Prin.)

1(2)

3

B 3

C

7 Econ. (Elem.Acc.) 7(8)

3

A 3

A

21 Eng. (Lit.) 21(22)

3

B 3

B

51 Spanish (Elem.)

51(52)

5

A 5

A

179 Eng. (Editing) 179

2

C

Phy. Tr.

.5

C

1918-19

Cat No

Subjects 1st Sem 2nd Sem
Hrs Gr Hrs

Gr

Psych. (Elem.)

1,2

2

B 2

B

Span. (2d yr.) 54,55

2

A 2

A

Econ. (Efficiency) 167,168

2

B 2

A

Econ. (Corp. Finance) 143,144

2

B 2

B

Econ. (Banking) 165,166

1.3

B 1.3

A

Econ. (Prob. Peace & Recon.)

50

1.3

C

Officers’ Training Course, Fort Sheridan, Ill. 6 s.h.
Service in the U.S. Army 7-18-18 to 1-15-19 10 s.h.
1238

1254

10-11-19

1919-20

Cat No Subjects Fall Winter Spring
Hrs Gr Gr Gr Hrs Gr
Com. (Intro. Econ. Theory) 135

2

A 2 A 2

A

Com. (Cost Account) 131

2

B 2 A

Com. (Com. Law) 189

1.3

B 1.3 B 1.3

A

Math. (2d yr. L.A. Math) 3

2.7

A 2.7 A 2.7

A

Com. (Pub. Ut. Acc’t) 132

2

A

 

Summer Session 1920

Cat No

Subjects July
Hrs

Gr

Econ VI

2

A

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Summer Session 1921

Cat No

Subjects August
Hrs

Gr

Pol Sci 11S

1.6

P

Pol Sci 117S

.4

P

[Summer Session 1921 from a card from the State University of Iowa, Iowa City. Registrar: H. C. Dorcass [University Examiner and Registrar Herbert Clifford Dorcas, B. Ph. Iowa, 1895; M.A. Columbia, 1903] 9/19/21]

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
ANN ARBOR

GRADUATE SCHOOL
OFFICE OF THE DEAN
[Transcript of courses taken
by Edward H. Chamberlin]

April 7, 1922.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

This is to certify that Mr. Edward H. Chamberlin, B.S. in Commerce, University of Iowa, was admitted to this Graduate School in the fall of 1920 as a candidate for the Master’s degree. During his residence in the School, Mr. Chamberlin has pursued the following courses:

First Semester, 1920-21

Course

No. Credit

Grade

Economics

8 2 hrs. B
Economics 13d 2 hrs.

A

Economics

17 1 hr. A

Second Semester, 1920-21

Economics

7 2 hrs. A
Economics 8a 2 hrs.

B

Economics

18 1 hr. A

First Semester, 1921-21

Philosophy

9a 3 hrs. A
Economics 6 3 hrs.

A

German

*9c —— B

Second Semester, 1921-22

Economics

8 2 hrs. Now taking.
Philosophy 9b 3 hrs.

Now taking.

German

*10c —— Now taking.

A=Excellent, B=Good, C=No graduate credit,  *Undergraduate course

Mr. Chamberlin was granted credit towards the Master’s degree at this University for graduate work done at the State University of Iowa. Upon the satisfactory completion of the work now being pursued, the degree of Master of Arts will be conferred upon Mr. Chamberlin in June, 1922.

[signed] Alfred H. Lloyd
Dean, Graduate School.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Carbon Copy of Reply to Chamberlin’s Application of 11 April 1922

13 April 1922

My dear Sir:

Your application for admission to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences as a candidate for a higher degree has been received and examined. The obvious difficulty in your case is your deficiency in French. I accordingly advise you to devote as much time as possible to work in this language between now and next fall. In the meantime you will do well to look over the scheme of subjects from which selections are made, in preparation for the general or preliminary examination for the doctorate, and at the beginning of the year you should consult Professor Charles H. Haskins, Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, as to the arrangement of your work. i see no specific deficiency in your preparation other than the French, and I see no reason to doubt that you can arrange a satisfactory plan of work for the doctorate in consultation with Dean Haskins and with the Department of Economics. It is impossible at present to make any very definite estimate of the length of time that your work would require. I should suppose that you ought to plan for two solid years at least, with the idea that if your work is not completed by the end of that time you may perhaps be able to finish up your thesis in absentia, and then to come back for your final examination. If a part of your time during either of the two years is devoted to work as assistant or instructor, at least a  third year in residence would presumably be necessary.

Very truly yours,
[Carbon copy unsigned]

Edward H. Chamberlin

Source: Harvard University Archives. GSAS student folders (UAV161.201.10), Box 117, Folder: E. H. Chamberlin.

Image: Edward Chamberlin. University of Iowa. The Hawkeye 1920, p. 37.

 

Categories
Economists Gender Michigan Radcliffe Wellesley

Radcliffe. Economics Ph.D. alumna. Margaret Elliott, 1924

 

To the irregular series “Meet an Economics Ph.D. alumna” I am pleased to add the 1924 Ph.D. graduate of Radcliffe, Margaret Elliott. I was hard-pressed to uncover much a a publication record for her, but what could be found indicates a career-long interest in the occupational experience of women. 

_________________________

Margaret Elliott’s 1924 Radcliffe Ph.D.

Margaret Elliott, A.M.

Subject, Economics.
Special Field, Labor Problems.
Dissertation, “Statistics of Occupation: A Study in Classification.”

Source: Annual Report of Radcliffe College, 1923-24, (March, 1925), p. 31.

_________________________

Biographical Note from the University of Michigan Archives

Margaret Elliott was born in Lowell, Massachusetts in 1891 [28 October]. She received her A.B. degree from Wellesley in 1914, and her M.A. and Ph.D. from Radcliffe in 1921 and 1924, respectively. Her dissertation was titled Earnings of Women in Business and the Professions.

Margaret Elliott was an instructor at Abbott Academy, Andover, Massachusetts from 1915 to 1917, and was appointed as an assistant professor of Personnel Management in the newly organized School of Business Administration at the University of Michigan in 1924, after she received her doctoral degree. In 1929, she was promoted to associate professor in both the business school and the Department of Economics in the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts. She was promoted to full professor in 1931 in both departments. Margaret Elliott was the first woman to be a full professor at the School of Business Administration.

Margaret Elliott was an active member of several organizations, including the National Federation of Business and Professional Women, and the American Association of University Women (AAUW). After she retired from her work with the AAUW, a national fellowship was established in her name.

Margaret Elliott married Professor John Evarts Tracy of the Michigan Law School in 1933. The couple had no children of their own, but they did raise his sister’s children after her death. John Tracy died in 1959. Margaret Elliott Tracy died in 1978 [12 May] at the age of 87.

Source: University of Michigan, Bentley Historical Library. Papers of Margaret Elliott: 1920-1954.

_________________________

Biographical Note (5 July 1941)

Personnel Expert Holds Chairs On Two Faculties: Margaret Elliot Tracy

The housewife who has been convinced by bouts with the family budget that men are welcome to the lion’s share of participation in economic matters would look with awe upon the achievements of Dr. MARGARET ELLIOTT TRACY, Professor of Economics in the Department of Economics and Professor of Personnel Management in the School of Business Administration.

Mrs. Tracy is the wife of Professor John E. Tracy, of the Law School. A native of Lowell, Massachusetts, where she was born on October 28, 1891, she went to Wellesley College after completing her early schooling in the Lowell public schools, and in 1914 received her Bachelor’s degree. She was Instructor at Abbot Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, from 1915 to 1917, when she determined to fit herself to teach economics.

At Radcliffe College in 1917-1918, she pursued graduate study in this field, but with American entry into World War I left college to assume personnel duties at the U. S. Ordnance Department’s Watertown Arsenal in charge of women’s work. Finding this type of occupation to her liking, she sought and obtained the position of Personnel Director for Waitt and Bond, Inc., of Newark, New Jersey, after the close of the war, staying for a year, 1919-1920, before returning to Radcliffe to complete her graduate studies. From Radcliffe in 1921, she received the M.A. degree, and in 1924, the Ph.D. degree. It was in this latter year that she took the first of the trips abroad which became her chief extra-curricular interest, although the jaunt over England and the Continent as a Whitney Traveling Fellow from Radcliffe combined much business with pleasure, since she was engaged throughout in study of European labor conditions.

In 1925, she came to Michigan as Assistant Professor of Economics, in 1929 was made Associate Professor, and assumed her present duties in the two branches of the University in 1932. While on sabbatical leave in 1931-1932, she took her longest trip, a complete globe-circling journey in which she centered her interest in the Far East and some of the remote islands of that region. Had the present war not intervened, she and Professor Tracy planned to continue sight-seeing in Egypt and the Near East on their sabbatical leave this year.

Mrs. Tracy is the author of Earnings of Women in Business and the Professions, published by the University of Michigan Press in 1930, and of a number of articles, including “Some Factors Affecting Earnings of Women in Business and the Professions,” appearing in Annals of the American Academy, May, 1929. She has been a member of the Board of Trustees of Wellesley College since 1936, and is affiliated with the American Economic Association, American Statistical Association, American Association for Labor Legislation, and the Personnel Research Federation.

Source: University of Michigan, The Michigan Alumnus (5 July 1941) posted at the University of Michigan  Faculty History Project page for Margaret Elliot Tracy.

_________________________

Biographical Note (1 September 1955)

Memoir: Margaret Elliot Tracy

The Regents of the University express to Margaret Elliott Tracy, Professor of Personnel Management, upon the occasion of her retirement from active membership on the University faculty, their kind appreciation of the contributions she has made as a brilliant scholar, a stimulating teacher, and a wise counselor of students.

Dr. Elliott received the A.B. degree from Wellesley College in 1914. From 1915 to 1917 she was Instructor at Abbot Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. In 1918, working for the United States Ordnance Department, she was in charge of Women’s Work at Watertown Arsenal. From 1919 to 1920, she was Personnel Director of Waitt & Bond, Inc. She earned the A.M. degree in 1921 and the Ph.D. in 1924 from Radcliffe College.

After studying at London University in 1924 as a Whitney Traveling Fellow of Radcliffe College, Dr. Elliott joined the faculty of the School of Business Administration of the University of Michigan as Assistant Professor of Personnel Management. Dr. Elliott held the dual appointment first as Associate Professor and later as Professor of Economics in the College of Literature, Science. and the Arts and as Professor of Personnel Management in the School of Business Administration, from 1931 to 1950.

On December 22, 1933, Dr. Elliott married John Evarts Tracy, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan. She was a member of the American Statistical Association, of the American Association for Labor Legislation, and of the American Economic Association. From 1926 to 1938 she belonged to the National Federation of Business and Professional Women, acting as Research Chairman of the Association from 1926 to 1930. Professor Tracy, in addition to her teaching and research, gave much time and ability to the consideration of student problems. As a member of the first Board of Governors of Residence Halls and of the first Executive Committee of the Institute for Human Adjustment, she helped establish fundamental policies of these organizations. Her work in the American Association of University Women, particularly while she was Chairman of the National Fellowship Awards Committee from 1949 to 1951, reflected her executive capacity. She did much good work in the University community and in her city to bring them into closer harmony.

The Regents in granting Professor Tracy’s request that she retire before her seventieth birthday extend to her their sincere congratulations upon her distinguished career and confer upon her the title Professor Emeritus of Personnel Management and hope that she may enjoy the courtesies usually offered emeritus members of the faculty.

Source: University of Michigan, Regents’ Proceedings (1 September 1955) posted at the University of Michigan Faculty History Project page for Margaret Elliot Tracy.

_________________________

Publications

Elliott, Margaret, and Grace E. Manson. “Some Factors Affecting Earnings of Business and Professional Women.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 143 (1929): 137–45.

____________. Earnings of Women in Business and the Professions. Michigan Business Studies, vol. III, No. 1 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1930).

Reviewed: American Economic Review, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Jun., 1931), pp. 321-323.

____________. “Review of The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization, by E. Mayo.” American Economic Review 24, no. 2 (1934): 322–23.

____________. “Review of Women and Wealth, by M. S. Branch.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 175 (1934): 271–271.

____________. “Review of College Women and the Social Sciences, by R. E. Mills.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 175 (1934): 272–272.

____________. “Review of The Women’s Trade Union Leagues in Great Britain and the United States of America, by G. Boone.” American Economic Review 32, no. 4 (1942): 919–20.

_________________________

Image Source:  Margaret Elliott Tracy giving a lecture [1958-59?]. University of Michigan, Bentley Historical Library, Ross School of Business Records.

 

 

 

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Economists Michigan

Chicago. Oscar Lange appointment as assistant professor, 1938

 

Oscar Lange’s first appointment at the University of Chicago began July 1, 1938 at the rank of assistant professor for a term of three years. This post provides a transcription of the official form submitted to the University of Chicago administration by the economics department. The brevity of the form is rather striking to those of us 21st century academics for whom a paper trail is more like an infrastructure investment.

I have also appended some information from Lange’s declaration of intention and his petition for naturalization that he filed while on the Chicago faculty. The limp indicated for his right leg is no doubt related to the differing lengths of his two legs that was noted in his selective service registration (Feb. 16, 1942), “right leg is shorter than other one.”

__________________________________

The University of Chicago

(FOR POSITIONS ABOVE THAT OF ASSISTANT)
TO BE TRANSMITTED TO THE DEAN OF FACULTIES

Date: January 31, 1938

To the Dean of Faculties:

Division of the Social Sciences. Department Economics.

The promotion/appointment of Oskar Lange to the position of

Assistant Professor is recommended, at a salary of
Four Thousand dollars ($4,000.00) beginning
July 1, 1938 for a period of Three years.

Mr. Lange has the following academic record:

A.B. (or B.S. or Ph.B.) (college) [left blank]; (year) [left blank]
Ph.D. or other higher degree (institution) LL.D., Cracow; (year) [left blank]

Previous experience in teaching:

Lecturer and Privatdozent at Cracow and Polish Free University;
one semester at Michigan; one year at California

Publications:

Partial list attached

Qualities as investigator:

Excellent

Qualities as a teacher:

Excellent. At California and Michigan said to be very successful.

Qualities as an administrator:

No knowledge.

Personality:

Good

Provision for salary:

General budget.

[signed] H. A. Millis, Chairman or head of department

The above recommendation has also been considered by Dean [signed] Robert Redfield

Further comments by Dean of Faculties: [left blank]

[signed] Emery T. Filbey, Dean of Faculties

 

PARTIAL LIST OF LANGE’S PUBLICATIONS

“Die Preisdispersion als Mittel zur statistischen Messung wirtschaftlicher Gleichgewichtsstörungen,” Veröffentlichungen der Frankfurter Gesellschaft für Konjunkturforschung (Herausgegeben von Dr. Eugen Altschul, 1932, Neue Folge Heft 4), pp. 7-56.

“Die allgemeine Interdependenz der Wirtschaftsgrössen und die Isolierungsmethode,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, Band IV, Heft 1, 1932, pp. 52-78.

“The Determinateness of the Utility Function,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 1 (1933-1934), pp. 218-225.

“A Note on the Determinateness of the Utility Function,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. II (1934-1935), pp. 75-78.

“Formen der Angebotsanpassung und wirtschaftliches Gleichgewicht,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, Band VI, Heft 3, 1935, pp. 358-65.

“Marxian Economics and Modern Economic Theory,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. II, No. 3, June, 1935, pp. 189-201.

“The Place of Interest in the Theory of Production,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. III, June, 1936, No. 3, pp. 159-192.

“On the Economic Theory of Socialism, Part I,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IV, No. 1, October, 1936, pp. 53-71.

“On the Economic Theory of Socialism, Part II,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IV, No. 2, February, 1937, pp. 123-42.

“Mr. Lerner’s Note on Socialist Economics,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IV, No. 2, February, 1937, pp. 143-44.

“Professor Knight’s Note on Interest Theory,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IV, No. 3, June, 1937, pp. 231-35.

Source: University of Chicago Library. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration. Records. Box 283. Folder 10 “Economics”.

__________________________________

From Oscar Lange’s Declaration of Intention

I, OSCAR RICHARD LANGE, now residing at 5617 Dorchester Ave. [Chicago, Illinois], occupation University Professor, aged 35 years, do declare on oath that my personal description is: Sex Male, color White, complexion Fair, color of eyes Blue, color of hair Blond, height 5 feet 6 inches; weight 176 pounds; visible distinctive marks none, race Polish; nationality Polish.
I was born in Tomaszow-Mazowiecki, Poland, on July 27, 1904. I am married. The name of my wife is Irena, we were married on January 3, 1932, at Cracow, Poland; she was born at Czestochowa, Poland, on October 1, 1906, entered the United States at New York, N.Y., on Aug. 20, 1937, for permanent residence therein, and now resides with me. I have no children…

I have not heretofore made a declaration of intention….
my last foreign residence was Czestochowa, Poland.
I emigrated to the United States of America from Havre, France,
my lawful entry for permanent residence in the United States was at New York, N.Y.
under the name of Oskar-Ryszard Lange, on August 20, 1937
on the vessel [SS] Paris…

[Signed]
Oscar Richard Lange

…at Chicago, Illinois this 18th day of November, anno Domini, 1939.

 

From Petition for Naturalization
September 17, 1942

The address for the Lange family changed to 6044 Stony Island Ave., Chicago, Illinois.

Added to “Visible distinctive marks limp on rt. leg

New member of the Lange family noted: son, Christopher, born Feb. 11, 1940, Chicago, Illinois.

The affidavit of witnesses was signed by

Professor Chester W. Wright (5747 Blackstone Ave., Chicago) and
Professor Jacob Viner (5554 Kenwood Ave., Chicago).

Source: National Archives and Record Administration. U.S. Department of Labor, Immigration and Naturalization Service. Oscar Richard Lange’s Declaration of Intention, November 18, 1939 and Petition for Naturalization, September 17, 1942.

Image Source: National Archives and Record Administration. U.S. Department of Labor, Immigration and Naturalization Service. Oscar Richard Lange’s Declaration of Intention, November 18, 1939.

 

Categories
Cornell Economist Market Economists Michigan

Michigan. Henry Carter Adams’ Plea on Own Behalf, 1887

 

The dirtiest my hands have ever become from archival work was during my exploration of Columbia University’s collection of John Maurice Clark’s papers. Now having the luxury of digital images to scroll through, I can work without forsaking the pleasures of biting my finger nails, rubbing my eyes and scratching my nose. The younger Clark was quite a paper hoarder so it pays to return to my folders with the images of  his documents.

This post builds on notes Clark took after a talk given by his colleague Joseph Dorfman on the economist Henry Carter Adams. Clark was struck by a phrase used by Adams, “all power carries responsibility,” that was a recurring theme in Clark’s own “preaching”. Attached to his brief note was a typed copy of a transcribed letter that Henry Carter Adams had written to the President of the University of Michigan to plead the case that he wished to be judged for a professorial appointment for the right reasons, i.e. not for any particular policy positions he might be thought not to hold but for exhibiting high scholarly virtues in his research and teaching.

Adams had earlier managed to attract the ire of a Cornell trustee, businessman Henry Williams Sage, much in the way Paul Samuelson was to attract the ire of the former member of the M.I.T. corporation, Lamott Dupont II, some 60 years later. Clearly not wanting his Cornell history to repeat itself, Henry Carter Adams successfully went pro-active with the University of Michigan in lobbying on his own behalf. He did get the appointment.

_________________________

Socialist Tease?

Henry C. Adams along with Richard T. Ely was attacked for “Coquetting with Anarchy” in The Nation (September 9, 1886), pp. 209-210. In that article Adams was incorrectly identified as President [C. K.] Adams of Cornell. The correction was immediately forthcoming in the following issue, September 16, 1886 issue, p. 234. The essay by Henry Carter Adams being attacked was “Principles that Should Control the Interference of the States in Industries” that was read before the “Constitution Club”of New York City.

_________________________

Several biographical accounts of Adams

Joseph Dorfman. The Economic Mind in American Civilization, vol. 3. Pp. 164-174.

S. Lawrence Bigelow, I. Leo Sharfman, and R. M. Wenley, “Henry Carter Adams,” The Journal of Political Economy, April 1922, pp. 201-11 (includes a selected bibliography);

Memorial to Former President Henry C. Adams,” The American Economic Review, September 1922, pp. 401-16.

Mark Perlman’s review of the 1954 publication of Henry Carter Adams’ Relation of the State to Industrial Action (1887) and his American Economic Association Presidential Address (1896) edited by Joseph Dorfman with introductory essay. [Note: this re-publication of two of Adams’ essays includes the letter transcribed from Dorfman’s copy in J. M. Clark’s papers.]

A. W. Coats. Henry Carter Adams: A Case Study in the Emergence of the Social Sciences in the United States, 1850-1900. Journal of American Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2 (October 1968), pp. 177-197.

Nancy Cohen. The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865-1914. University of North Carolina Press, 2002. (Especially Chapter 5 “The American Scholar Revisited”, pp. 154-158, 162-164, 169-174)

_________________________

Henry C. Adams, some early publications

The Position of Socialism in the Historical Development of Political Economy. Penn Monthly, April 1870, pp. 285-94.

Outline of Lectures upon Political Economy (Baltimore: privately printed, 1881); (second edition, Ann Arbor: privately printed, 1886).

The Labor Problem,” Sibley College Lectures.—XI. Scientific American Supplement, August 21, 1886.

Adams’ statement in The Labor Problem, edited by William E. Barns (New York: Harper, 1886), pp. 62-63.

Principles that Should Control the Interference of the States in Industries” read before the “Constitution Club” of the City of New York. [Fun Fact: Frank Taussig’s copy]

Relation of the State to Industrial Action. Publications of the American Economic Association, 1887. Pp. 471-549.

Public Debts: An Essay in the Science of Finance (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1887).

_________________________

Note by John Maurice Clark attached to transcribed copy of Henry Carter Adams’ letter

Letter of Henry Carter Adams (1851-1921)
to President James B. Angell, March 15, 1887.

J.M.C. Nov. 27, 1951, Comment, from memory of Dorfman’s remarks yesterday.

President Angell appointed Adams professor after receipt of this letter, and Thomas Cooley (father of Charles Horton Cooley?) who was on the original Interstate Commerce Commission, got Adams the job of chief statistician of the Commission, where he created the system of control of accounts of railroads aiming at enough uniformity to make financial and operating reports comparable, so totals for the country and comparisons of companies would mean something.

Adams had already commented on Jevon’s “The State in Relation to Labor[”] and Adams’ original paper on this theme was later (later than Mar 15, 1887) worked over and enlarged, and came to be regarded as a classic by economists between Adams’ generation and mine.

_______________

[Clark’s note] This is the letter of a man 36 years old who had earned his academic freedom by a sober and responsible attitude. From my standpoint, it is especially interesting because Adams gives such central importance to the principle that all power carries responsibility (presumably inner responsibility plus subjection to checks and controls where appropriate). This is the principle I’ve been preaching (or announcing factually) as the only alternative to regimentation or chaos.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

COPY

Ithaca, N.Y. March 15, 1887.

Dear Dr. Angell:

I don’t think there is any danger of my misunderstanding your letter or the spirit in which it was written. Last year, your questions came to me with the shock of a complete surprise, but I am coming to be pretty well accustomed to such expressions now.

You ask if I can help you any more so you can see your way clear on my nomination. I don’t see as I can, except it be to suggest that, in my opinion, your point of view in this matter is not the right one. If you make a man’s opinions the basis of his election to a professorship, you do, whether you intend it or not, place bonds upon the free movement of his intellect. It seems to me that a board has two things to hold in view. First, is a man a scholar? Can he teach in a scholarly manner? Is he fair to all parties in the controverted questions which come before him? Second, is he intellectually honest? If these two questions are answered in the affirmative, his influence upon young men cannot be detrimental.

Upon these points, certainly, nothing new can be said. I have served for five years as an apprentice and you have had opportunity to know. Or, with regard to the fairness in which topics are presented in the classroom, you have the outline of (the) lectures. My conscious purpose in teaching is two-fold. To portray social problems to men as they will find them to be when they leave the University and to lead men to recognize that morality is an every day affair.

But all this, you will say, is by the point. You say you do not know what my views are on capital and labor. I am not surprised at that for I have intentionally withheld them. No one knows them and I had madeup my mind to keep them to myself until I had worked through my study of the industrial society. My reason for such a decision was, that, in my study of social questions I had found myself on all sides of the question, I started as an individualist of the most pronounced type. But my advocacy of it led me to perceive its errors, and my criticisms were formulated before I read any literature of socialism. But when, upon coming into contact with socialistic writers I found their criticisms were the same as my own I was for a while carried away by their scheme. But upon further study, I found their plans to be, not only as I though impracticable, but contrary to the fundamental principles of English political philosophy, in which I still believed. You can imagine that was not a pleasant condition for one appreciative of logical symmetry. You said a year ago that my views were not logical, that is, that some of my expressions were contradictory to each other. I don’t doubt that they appeared so, it seems bad logic to admit the purpose of individualism and the criticism of socialists at the same time. You say now in your letter that I have not worked out my ideas into clear and definite shape. That is true, but I am doing it as fast as I can and in my own way. My book upon Pub. Debts is one stage in this direction.

But to go back to the development of this subject in my own mind. The illogical position into which my mind had drifted as the result of the first five years of study, was the occasion of keen intellectual pain: but the sense of the necessity of harmony led me finally to discover a principle, which I thought, and still think, adequate to bridge over the chasm between the purpose of individualism and the criticisms of socialism. This principle is the principle of personal responsibility in the administration of all social power, no matter in what shape that power may exist. This principle has given form to our political society: I wish it to be brought over into industrial relations. Its realization will cure the ills of which socialists complain, without curbing or crushing that which is the highest in the individual. I thought, at first, this principle to be so simple that its statement must gain for it quick recognition. But when I tried to make that statement, and work the theory out, I was at once surprised and chagrined to see what a task lay before me. It is useless to deny that the interests of the privileged classes in our civilization is against responsible administration of industrial power. I worked at it for a year, and then came to the conclusion that I did not yet know enough, nor was I sure enough of my position, to make public the thought which had assumed direction of my studies. It was then that I took up the study of finance and went to work upon Pub. Debts. This is the most simple of any of the topics which must be treated as the subject of constructive economics opened before me: it was also furthest removed from the points likely to cause controversy. I thought I might, perhaps, gain the reputation of a sound thinker so that expressions of views more unusual might attract a candid reading from scholarly men. It has taken a year and a half longer than I had anticipated, and now that it is done seems to have dwarfed in importance.

I do not think this narration will relieve you from embarrassment. I do not see that anything can do that, except a promise on my part to give expression only to orthodox views of social relations. But it has relieved me somewhat and I trust you will consider that an adequate apology. I have of course full confidence in your personal friendship: I only wish you might have equal confidence in my scholarly purposes.

Very truly yours,
H.C. ADAMS.

P.S.

May I add a postscript, for I am sure it is an unjustifiable pride which kept me from inserting it in the body of the letter. I presume the expression(s) of my views which have given you the greatest solicitude are to be found in the Sibley address of last year, and in the syndicate article which I wrote on the Knights of Labor. I do not wish to recall anything said, but I am willing to say that these expressions were as unwise as they were unpremeditated. In justice to myself I should say: that the Sibley address was on Friday afternoon and my invitation was on the Wednesday previous. Professor [R. H.] Thurston said he had been disappointed in his lecturer for the afternoon, that he did not like to postpone the meeting, and that he would like me to open a discussion on the labor problem. He told me, who besides myself would speak, and they were all decidedly opposed to any expression of sympathy with the struggle of the Knights then going on. After my opening address, the man against whom I talked, who, it was said, would reply to me, took his hat and left. Others spoke, among them President [Charles Kendal] Adams, Mr. Smith [sic, perhaps Mr. Frank B. Sanborn?] and Henry [W.] Sage. The President was not dogmatical but did not understand what I tried to say. The others were. My part in the discussion has cost me a professorship, for I do not see how, with the views of Mr. Sage to the functions of a teacher, he can vote for me. It was after the address was made that the talk began, and I thought it then cowardly not to let it be printed, and dishonest to change it. So it went in, as nearly as I could remember as it was given. I think it unfair to judge of my classroom work on this address.

With regard to the syndicate article [“What Do These Strikes Mean?”, a copy attached to Adams’ letter to James B. Angell dated March 25, 1887], I confess myself to have been deceived by the attitude of the Knights of Labor during their strike on the Gould system or I should not have written it. In their articles of complaint, they said certain things which I believed to be true, and I thought the men who drew them up had thought the labor problem through to its end, and had made a stand on a principle in harmony with English Liberties. If so, it was time for men of standing to declare themselves. But it turns out that the Knights hit the mark by a chance shot. They did not know what they were about and got whipped as they deserved. The result of this unfortunate venture is, that I believe more strongly than ever in the necessity of scholarship as one element in the solution of this terrible question that is upon us.

Have you seen “The Ind. Revolution” by Arnold Toynbee? His death is a loss. The scraps of his lectures and letters show him to have had much the same purpose as myself in his studies.

Respectfully
H.C.A.

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Collection, Economic Theory and Methodology, Box 28. Folder “Group Power carries moral responsibility”.

Image Source: Johns Hopkins University Sheridan Libraries, graphic and pictorial collection. Henry Carter Adams (Ph.D., Johns Hopkins, 1878). Photograph by Sam B. Revenaugh (1847-1893), Ann Arbor, Mich.

Categories
Brown Chicago Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Economics Programs Harvard Illinois Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Swarthmore Vanderbilt Vassar Virginia Washington University Wellesley Williams Wisconsin Yale

United States. Courses of Study of Political Economy. 1876 and 1892-93.

 

The first article in the inaugural issue of The Journal of Political Economy, “Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93,” was written by the founding head of the University of Chicago’s department of political economy, J. Laurence Laughlin. This post provides Laughlin’s appendix that provided information about economics courses taught in 65 colleges/universities in the United States during the last quarter of the 19th century. The bottom line of the table is that “aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 [were] more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876”.

__________________________

How little Political Economy and Finance were taught only fifteen years ago, as compared with the teaching of to-day, must be surprising even to those who have lived and taught in the subject during that period…. At the close of the war courses of economic study had practically no existence in the university curriculum; in short, the studious pursuit of economics in our universities is scarcely twenty years old. These considerations alone might be reasons why economic teaching has not yet been able to color the thinking of our more than sixty millions of people. But about the close of the first century of our national existence it may be said that the study of Political Economy entered upon a new and striking development. This is certainly the marked characteristic of the study of Political Economy in the last fifteen years. How great this has been may be seen from the tables giving the courses of study, respectively, in about 60 institutions in the year 1876 and in 1892-3. (See Appendix I.) The aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 are more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876.” [Laughlin, p. 4]

__________________________

Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93.

Note: Returns could not be obtained from Johns Hopkins University, Amherst College, and some other institutions.

Institution.

Description of Courses.

1876.

1892-3.

No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year. No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year.

University of Alabama.

Text Book and Lectures, Senior Year

Finance and Taxation

4

2

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Boston University. Principles of Political Economy 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine.

Elementary (Required)

Advanced (Elective)

5

14

4

4

12

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 88
Brown University, Providence, R. I.

Elementary

History of Econ. Thought

Advanced Course

[2nd] Advanced Course

Seminary of History, Pol. Sci., and Pol. Econ.

16-17

3

3

3

3

2

33-34

11-12

11

11

23

[Total hours of instruction per year] 40-42½ 242-250
University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. 1.     Introductory Political Economy

2.     Descriptive Political Economy

3.     Advanced Political Economy

4.     Industrial and Economic History

5.     Scope and Method

6.     History of Political Economy

7.     Unsettled Problems

8.     Socialism

9.     Social Economics

10.   Practical Economics

11.   Statistics

12.   Railway Transportation

13.   Tariff History of U.S.

14.   Financial History of U.S.

15.   Taxation

16.   Public Debts

17.   Seminary

5

4

5

4

4

5

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

12

12

12

24

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 996
Colby University, Waterville, Maine.

Elementary [1st]

Elementary [2nd]

Theoretical

Historical

5

7

2

2

4

4

13

10

13

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 35 138
Columbia College (School of Political Science, New York City. 1.     Principles of Political Economy (Element.)

2.     Historical Practical Political Economy (Advanced)

3.     History of Economic Theory (Advanced)

4.     Public Finance (Adv.)

5.     Railroad Problems (Adv.)

6.     Finan. History of U.S. (Adv.)

7.     Tariff History of U.S. (Adv.)

8.     Science of Statistics (Adv.)

9.     Communism and Socialism (Adv.)

10.   Taxation and Distribution (Adv.)

11.   Seminarium in Political Economy (Element.)

12.   Seminarium in Public Finance and Economy (Adv.)

13.   Law of Taxation (Adv.)

3 and 5, 6 and 7, 8 and 9
given in alternate years.

2

 

 

 

17

 

 

 

2

 

3

2

 

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

 

 

2

2

17

 

34

34

 

34

25

34

17

34

34

17

34

 

34

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 34 764
Columbian University, Washington, D.C. Elements of Political Economy 5 8
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40
Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 1.     Elementary Political Economy

2.     Advanced Political Economy

3.     Finance

4.     Financial History

5.     Railroad Problems

6.     Currency and Banking

7.     Economic History

8.     Statistics

2

11

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

34

34

34

13

11

10

34

34

[Total hours of instruction per year] 22 408
Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Advanced Finance and Tariff

6

6

6

6

6

6 2/3

4 1/6

3 1/3

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 85
University of Denver, Col. 1.     Ely’s Introduction

2.     Ingram’s History

3.     Gilman’s Profit-Sharing

4.     Ely, Labor Movement in America

5.     Kirkup’s and Rae’s Socialism

6.     Finance and Taxation

7.     International Commerce

2

1

1

2

2

4

2

15

5

5

5

5

5

5

[Total hours of instruction per year] 90
DePauw University, Greencastle, Ind.

Economics (Elementary)

Seminarium (Advanced)

4

12

4

2

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 144
Drury College, Springfield, Mo. Elementary Course 5 6 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 60
Emory College, Oxford, Ga. Jevons’ Text, and Lectures. 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Franklin and Marshall College. Political Economy, (Walker’s) 2 15 2 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 40
Georgetown College, Ky. 1.     General Economics

2.     Special Topics

5

15

3

3

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 75 120
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 1.     Introductory

2.     Theory (Advanced)

3.     Economic History from 1763

4.     Railway Transportation

5.     Tariff History of U.S.

6.     Taxation and Public Debts

7.     Financial Hist. of U.S.

8.     Condition of Workingmen

9.     Economic Hist. to 1763

10.   History of Theory to Adam Smith

Seminary

3

3

30

30

3

3

3

3

2

3

2

3

3

2

2

30

30

30

15

15

30

15

30

30

15

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 735
Haverford College, Pa. Economic Theory 2 40
[Total hours of instruction per year] 80
Howard University, Washington, D. C. Elementary 5 10 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 50
Illinois College and Whipple Academy, Jacksonville, Ill. Newcomb’s Polit. Economy, Seniors 5 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 75
University of Illinois, Champaign, Ill. Senior Class 5 11 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 55 55
Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa.

Political Economy

Taxation

Railroad Problems

Socialism

5

10

3

3

3

3

37

14

12

11

[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 222
State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

Elements of Economics

Currency and Banking

Industrial Revolutions of 18th Century

Recent Econ. History and Theory

Railroads, Pub. Regulation of

Seminary in Polit. Econ.

5

 

14

 

5

5

2

 

2

2

1

14

11

14

 

11

10

35

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 230
Kansas State Agricultural College, Manhattan, Kan. Elementary, 4th year 5 8 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40 55
Kansas State University, Lawrence, Kansas. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Applied Economics

3.     Statistics

4.     Land Tenures

5.     Finance

5

19

5

3

2

2

2

19

19

19

19

19

[Total hours of instruction per year] 95 266
Lake Forest University, Lake Forest, Ill. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3

11

3

3

16

13

[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 87
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass. 1.     Political Economy, Elem., Junior Year

2.     Financial Hist. of U.S., Jun. and Sen. Year

3.     Taxation, Junior and Senior Year

4.     History of Commerce

5.     History of Industry, Junior and Senior Year.

6.     Socialism, etc. (Option), Jun. and Sen. Year

7.     History of Economic Theory (Opt.), Senior

8.     Statistics and Graphic Methods, Junior

9.     Statistics and Sociology (Option) Senior

2

 

 

 

15

 

 

 

3

3

 

3

3

 

3

2

 

2

3

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 375
Michigan Agricultural College. Primary Course 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Elements of Political Economy

3.     Hist. Devel. of Industr. Society

4.     Finance

5.     Problems in Pol. Econ

6.     Transportation Problem

7.     Land Tenure and Agrarian Movements

8.     Socialism and Communism

9.     Currency and Banking

10.   Tariff History of U.S.

11.   Indust. and Comm. Develop. of U.S.

12.   History of Pol. Econ.

13.   Statistics

15.   Economic Thought

16.   Labor and Monopoly Problems

17.   Seminary in Finance

18.   Seminary in Economics

20.   Social Philosophy with Economic Relations

21.   Current Econ. Legislation and Literature

 

18

 

3

4

3

4

4

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

 

2

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

 

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 45 756
Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont. 1.     Elementary (Junior Class)

2.     Advanced (Senior Class)

3.     Finance (Senior Class)

4.     Seminary

4

4

10

10

3

2

2

1

35

21

14

21

[Total hours of instruction per year] 80 196
University of Minnesota. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Am. Pub. Economy

4.     Undergraduate Seminary

5.     Graduate Seminary

5

13

4

4

4

2

1

13

13

10

23

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 65 226
University of Mississippi, University, Miss. Advanced 5 30
[Total hours of instruction per year] 150
Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass.

Polit. Econ. (General)

Polit. Econ. Seminary

4

2

12

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 72
College of New Jersey at Princeton.

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Elective)

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Required)

Finance (Elective)

Historics—Econ. Semin.

2

13

2

2

2

16

16

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 26 94
College of the City of New York. 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48*
New Hampshire College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Hanover, N. H. Elementary—Perry or Walker 4 10-12 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 50
Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. 1.     Elementary Polit. Econ.

2.     Advanced Polit. Econ.

3.     Finance

4.     History Econ. Thought

5.     Economic and Social Problems

6.     “Money,” etc.

5

12

5

5

3

3

3

2

11

12

25

13

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 337
Ohio State University.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

Seminary (Indust. History)

2

2

2

2

38

26

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 228
Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio. 4 12 4 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 48
Penn. Military Academy, Chester, Penn. Elementary 5 13
[Total hours of instruction per year] 65
University of Pennsylvania, Wharton, School of Finance and Economy, Philadelphia, Penn. 1.     Grad. Course in Finance

2.     Grad. Course in Theoretical Polit. Econ.

3.     Grad. Course in Statistics

4.     Elem. Course in Finance

5.     Elem. Course in Theoret. Polit. Econ.

6.     Elem. Course in Statistics

7.     Elem. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

8.     Course in Money

9.     Course in Banking

10.   Advanced Course in Political Economy

11.   Economic History of Europe

12.   Grad. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

13.   Econ. and Fin. History of U.S.

14.   Grad. Econ. History of the U.S.

15.   Grad. English Econ. History from 13th to 17th century

16.   Modern Econ. History.

 

 

1

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

1

2

3

2

2

4

 

3

3

30

30

30

30

30

15

15

15

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

30

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 1020
Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind. Elementary Course 3 19
[Total hours of instruction per year] 57
Randolph Macon College, Ashland, Va. Elementary 2 32 2 32
[Total hours of instruction per year] 64 64
University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.

Elementary

Econ. Polit. History U.S.

5

14

5

1

14

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 90
Rutger’s College. Polit. Econ. (Elementary) 3 12 4 22
[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 88
Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

Elementary Course

Adv. Course in Theory

Seminarium

Practical Studies

3

12

3

3

2

2

14

14

10

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 128
South Carolina College, Columbia, S.C.

Polit. Econ. Senior Class

Applied Polit. Econ.

2

2

40

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Penn.

Polit. Econ. (Walker)

Finance

Protection and Free Trade

Money and Banking

History of Econ. Theories

4

4

4

4

4

20

10

10

10

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 240
Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y.

Elementary

Finance

Industrial Development since 1850

Seminary

3

2

2

2

14

10

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 162
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn.

Elementary

Advanced (Post-Graduate)

3

2

20

Varies

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100?
University of Texas, Austin, Texas. General 3 36
[Total hours of instruction per year] 108
Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

4

13

3

4

2

17

17

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 52 153
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.

Political Economy, Elementary

Political Economy, Advanced

3

36

3

3

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 108 216
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York.

Principles of Economics

Economic History

Railroads, Trusts, and Relation of State to Monopolies

Labor Problem and Socialism

Seminary

 

 

3

3

2

 

2

2

18

18

18

 

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont.

Elementary

Advanced

3

2

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.

Theory of Economics

Science of Society

3

26

3

16

16

[Total hours of instruction per year] 78 88
Washington and Jefferson College, Washington, Pa. Political Economy 3 11 3 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 48
Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Va.

Elementary

Advanced

3

3

14

26

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Washington University, St. Louis. Prescribed Course 3 20 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 60
Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.

Industrial History

Economic Theory

Statistics (Seminary)

Socialism (Seminary)

3

3

3

3

18

18

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut.

General Introductory (Sen.)

General Introductory (Jun.)

Economic Problems

36

2

3

2

36

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 54 198
West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Elementary Pol. Economy

Advanced Pol. Economy

2

2

14

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
Williams College, Williamstown, Mass. Political Economy 6 14 3 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 84 45
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

Econ. Seminary

Distribution of Wealth

History of Pol. Econ.

Money

Public Finance

Statistics

Recent Econ. Theories

Synoptical Lectures

Outlines of Economics

2

5

5

5

3

3

3

1

4

37

14½

12

10½

37

12

14½

15

37

[Total hours of instruction per year] 612½
Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Pol. Econ.**—Elem. (2)

Pol. Econ.—Adv. (3)

Economic History (2)

Finance, Public (2)

Finance, Corporate (2)

Mathematical Theory (1)

Seminary Instruction (2)

3

2

 

36

36

36

4

3

4

2

3

1

1

36

36

36

36

36

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 648

* [College of the City of New York] A few hours additional are given in the work of the Department of Philosophy; the whole number amounting to some 52 or 53.

** [Yale University] Figures in brackets represent numbers of courses under each head.

SourceAppendix I to “The Study of Political Economy in the United States” by J. Laurence Laughlin, The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 1, no. 1 (December, 1892), pp. 143-151.

Image Source:  J. Laurence Laughlin drawn in the University of Chicago yearbook Cap and Gown (1907), p. 208.